Oakes and Sheffield

In the matter of *Oakes and Sheffield*, Benjamin J of the Family Court of Australia considered applications concerning costs and the discharge of an interlocutory injunction. The proceedings involved Ms Oakes and Mr Sheffield, with the primary dispute revolving around the costs incurred in substantive proceedings and the continuation of a consent injunctive order.

The court was required to determine whether the father should bear the costs of the mother's counsel for specific hearing dates in February 2013. Additionally, the court had to consider the fate of other outstanding costs applications and the continued operation of a consent injunctive order that required the retention of $30,000 in a trust account.

Benjamin J ordered that Mr Sheffield pay the costs of Ms Oakes for her counsel's attendance at the substantive proceedings on 4, 6, 7, and 8 February 2013, with these costs to be agreed or assessed on a party and party basis. All other costs applications, including the costs of the costs application itself, were dismissed. The consent injunctive order of 14 May 2012, which mandated the retention of $30,000, was discharged 14 days from the date of the order. All remaining extant applications were also dismissed. The court certified that it was reasonable to engage counsel for the mother's attendance at the hearing.