Pope and Pope (Costs)

The Family Court of Australia considered an application by the husband for costs of property settlement proceedings. The dispute arose from the wife's refusal of settlement offers made by the husband, which significantly exceeded the entitlement she ultimately received. The husband argued that the wife unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings, provided selective disclosure, and gave misleading evidence, resulting in unnecessary legal expenses for him, including the engagement of senior and junior counsel.

The court was required to determine whether to make an order for costs against the wife pursuant to section 117(2A) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). This involved assessing whether the wife's conduct during the proceedings warranted such an order, particularly in light of the husband's settlement offers and the wife's subsequent actions. The court also considered the reasonableness of engaging senior and junior counsel for both parties.

Justice Ryan found that the wife's conduct, including selective disclosure and misleading evidence, had unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings and increased the husband's legal costs. The court applied the principles established in cases such as *Kelly (No.2)* and *Jensen*, which allow for costs orders where a party's conduct has led to an unreasonable prolongation of litigation or unnecessary expense. The court noted that the wife's refusal of settlement offers that were substantially more favourable than her final entitlement supported the husband's application.

The court ordered that the wife pay the husband's costs of and incidental to the proceedings in the sum of $220,000.00, with provisions for interest and the sale of certain properties to satisfy this order. The court also certified that it was reasonable for both parties to have engaged senior and junior counsel.