Rudman and Rudman (Costs)

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

RUDMAN & RUDMAN (COSTS) [2011] FamCA 150

FAMILY LAW – COSTS

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth): s 117(1), s 117(2), s 117(2A)

Marsden & Winch [2009] FamCAFC 152
Rice & Asplund (1979) FLC 90-725
Rudman & Rudman [2010] FamCA 962

APPLICANT: Ms Rudman

RESPONDENT: Mr Rudman

FILE NUMBER: CAC 1034 of 2007

DATE DELIVERED: 23 February 2011

PLACE DELIVERED: Canberra

PLACE HEARD: Canberra

JUDGMENT OF: Faulks DCJ

HEARING DATE: 23 February 2011

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Self-represented litigant

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Self-represented litigant

Orders

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Mr Rudman will pay the sum of $12,000.00 to Ms Rudman in respect of costs of the proceedings about the children.  Such sum to be paid by an offset in relation to $7,500.00 Ms Rudman is due to pay to him, together with the sum of $4,500.00 within three months of this date or if the sum has already been paid the whole amount within three months of the date of these Orders.

2. The other Applications made by Mr Rudman in his response are dismissed, and all extant Applications are dismissed. 

3. The matter is removed from the pending cases list and concluded before this Court.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Rudman & Rudman (Costs) is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT CANBERRA

FILE NUMBER: CAC 1034 of 2007

Ms Rudman

Applicant

And

Mr Rudman

Respondent

EX-TEMPORE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. In this matter, I have to some extent indicated during the course of the proceedings my reasons for taking the decisions I do.  I now outline in a formal way my reasons for my decision.

2. The application by Ms Rudman is made with my leave out of time under s 117(2) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”). The application is made on the basis that she seeks that there should be indemnity costs, in effect, from the date on which she was notified of the change in the circumstances relating to Mr Rudman, from 9 April 2010. Those costs she identifies substantially – and I say that because it is not entirely clear from her affidavit – in the sum of about $59,971.70, these being what she says were her bills from 17 March 2010 until 31 August 2010.

Relevant Law

1. Section 117(1) of the Act relevantly provides:

   Subject to subsection (2), subsection 70NFB(1) and sections 117AA, 117AB, 117AC and 118, each party to proceedings under this Act shall bear his or her own costs.

2. Section 117(2) of the Act relevantly provides:

   If, in proceedings under this Act, the court is of opinion that there are circumstances that justify it in doing so, the court may, subject to subsections (2A), (4) and (5) and the applicable Rules of Court, make such order as to costs and security for costs, whether by way of interlocutory orders or otherwise, as the court considers just.

3. Section 117(2A) of the Act…