RILEY & MASSALSKI

In the Family Court of Australia, His Honour McClelland DCJ considered an application by the de facto husband, Mr Riley, for an order that the de facto wife, Ms Massalski, pay his costs of and incidental to the proceedings on an indemnity or, alternatively, a party/party basis. Ms Massalski opposed this application. The proceedings had been cross-vested from the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The court was required to determine whether Ms Massalski should be ordered to pay Mr Riley's costs, and on what basis. This involved considering Ms Massalski's conduct during the substantive proceedings, specifically her failure to comply with her disclosure obligations and her pursuit of unmeritorious contentions. The court also had to assess the overall outcome of the substantive proceedings to determine if Ms Massalski was wholly or substantially unsuccessful, and whether she had imprudently rejected a formal written offer of settlement made by Mr Riley.

His Honour found that Ms Massalski's conduct warranted a costs order in favour of Mr Riley. The court considered her failure to meet her disclosure obligations and her insistence on unmeritorious arguments as significant factors. Furthermore, the court took into account the outcome of the substantive proceedings and the fact that Ms Massalski had rejected a formal settlement offer from Mr Riley.

Consequently, the court ordered that Ms Massalski pay Mr Riley's costs of and incidental to the Supreme Court of Victoria proceedings and the Family Court proceedings from 24 February 2017 onwards, on a party/party basis. These costs were to be paid within 28 days of agreement or assessment.