Pelton and Banbury (No 2)

The Family Court of Australia, in the matter of *Pelton & Banbury (No. 2)*, considered an application by the wife for costs against the husband. The dispute arose from parenting and financial proceedings, where the wife sought an order for the husband to pay her costs for two days of court attendance.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the circumstances justified an order for costs against the husband, pursuant to section 117(2) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved determining if the husband's conduct in the proceedings warranted an order for costs, despite the general rule that parties bear their own costs. The court also considered the extent to which the wife's interim applications had been successful in assessing the appropriateness of a costs order.

Justice Macmillan found that while the wife's interim applications had been largely successful, the orders made were not identical to those sought, particularly concerning spousal maintenance, child support, and injunctive relief. However, the court was satisfied that the husband's conduct, including the late filing of answering material and a Notice of Child Abuse, and his opposition to certain orders without substantial basis, unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings and necessitated an adjournment. Consequently, the court ordered the husband to pay the wife's costs for the second day of the hearing, fixed at $2,431.