Salt and Salt (No 2)

[2020] FamCA 170

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SALT & SALT (NO. 2) [2020] FamCA 170

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs – meaning of wholly unsuccessful in the proceedings – significance of unfavourable fact finding in relation to conduct in the proceedings – where an order is made for the Father to pay 85 percent of the Mother’s costs on a party/party basis.

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) ss 117(2A)
Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) Ch 19.

Hawkins & Roe [2012] FamCAFC 77

I & I (1995) FLC 92-625

M v M (1988) 166 CLR 69

Medlon & Medlon (No 6) (Indemnity Costs) (2015) FLC 93-664

Penfold v Penfold (1980) 144 CLR 311

U v U (2002) 211 CLR 238

APPLICANT: Mr Salt

RESPONDENT: Ms Salt

FILE NUMBER: CAC 1754 of 2016

DATE DELIVERED: 20 March 2020

PLACE DELIVERED: Canberra

PLACE HEARD: Canberra

JUDGMENT OF: Gill J

HEARING DATE: 13 March 2020

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Mr R Hoult

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Infinity Legal

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr J Haddock

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Dobinson Davey Clifford Simpson

Orders

1. The Father pay 85 per cent of the Mother’s costs of the parenting substantive proceedings on a party-party basis as agreed or as assessed.

2. The Father pay the Mother’s costs of the stay application on a party-party basis as agreed or as assessed.

Note: The form of the order is subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment by this Court under the pseudonym Salt & Salt has been approved by the Chief Justice pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

Note: This copy of the Court’s Reasons for Judgment may be subject to review to remedy minor typographical or grammatical errors (r 17.02A(b) of the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth)), or to record a variation to the order pursuant to r 17.02 Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth).

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT CANBERRA

FILE NUMBER: CAC 1754 of 2016

Mr Salt

Applicant

And

Ms Salt

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Background

1. This application concerns the costs of the substantive hearing between the parties in relation to their child, and the costs in relation to an application for a stay pending appeal in relation to the orders made in respect of the child.

2. Proceedings were conducted between the parties in relation to property and child related matters from October 2016.  Although the parties were ultimately able to resolve the property dispute between them by consent, parenting arrangements fell to be determined at a final hearing taking place between 17 September 2018 and 21 September 2018 and on 6 November 2018.  Judgment was delivered on 18 December 2019.

3. The Mother seeks her costs of the parenting aspect of the proceedings be paid by the Father as agreed or as taxed.[1]

   [1] An apparent reference to assessment under the rules.

4. Subsequently the Father lodged an appeal and applied for a stay of those orders.  He was…