FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| REAGLE & ALTO | [2020] FCCA 936 |
| Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – Costs – Applicant to parenting proceedings and paying assessed child support – where Applicant to parenting proceedings excluded from parentage of the subject child during proceedings – where Respondent purports to have doubted Applicant’s parentage of child from prior to commencement of proceedings – where basis for Respondent’s doubt as to paternity not communicated to Applicant until months into proceedings – where Applicant consented to parentage testing upon receipt of basis for Respondent’s doubts – where costs sought under section 143 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) – where costs sought under section 117 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) – where section 143 costs consented to close to final hearing of costs applications – where a party found to have prolonged proceedings – where found appropriate to make a costs order – whether costs should be assessed on party/party, indemnity, or ‘special costs order’ basis – where found appropriate to make a special costs order. |
| Legislation: Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth), ss.107, 143 |
| Cases cited: Penfold v Penfold (1980) 144 CLR 311 |
| Applicant: | MR REAGLE |
| Respondent: | MS ALTO |
| File Number: | WOC 270 of 2019 |
| Judgment of: | Judge Morley |
| Hearing date: | 23 October 2019 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 23 October 2019 |
| Delivered at: | Sydney |
| Delivered on: | 1 May 2020 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Ms Dart |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Family Law Matters |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Mr Cook |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | Sydney Family Law Specialists Pty Ltd |
ORDERS
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
The Respondent pay the Applicant’s costs of the proceedings fixed in the sum of $15,000.00, such payment to be made by the Respondent to the Applicant within 12 months.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Reagle & Alto is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT WOLLONGONG |
WOC 270 of 2019
| MR REAGLE |
Applicant
And
| MS ALTO |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction
These parenting proceedings were commenced by the Applicant Mr Reagle (‘the Applicant’) in relation to the child X born in 2018 (‘the Child’). The Respondent is the Child’s Mother, Ms…
Continue reading REAGLE & ALTO
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- REAGLE & ALTO [2020] FCCA 936
- Case
- [2020] FCCA 936
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether to make a costs order under section 143 of the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth) and section 117 of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The applicant had consented to the section 143 costs close to the final hearing of the costs applications. The court also considered whether a party had prolonged the proceedings and, if so, whether it was appropriate to make a costs order. Finally, the court had to decide whether costs should be assessed on a party/party, indemnity, or 'special costs order' basis.
Judge Morley found it appropriate to make a costs order, determining that a special costs order was warranted. The court's reasoning, though not detailed in the provided text, led to the conclusion that the respondent's conduct, including the delayed communication of paternity doubts and the subsequent proceedings, justified a departure from standard cost assessments.
The court ordered that the respondent pay the applicant's costs of the proceedings fixed in the sum of $15,000.00, with payment to be made within 12 months.
Orders
Orders of the court
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.
The Respondent pay the Applicant’s costs of the proceedings fixed in the sum of $15,000.00, such payment to be made by the Respondent to the Applicant within 12 months.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.