Stapleton & Hayes (Costs)
[2011] FamCAFC 124
•10 June 2011
FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| STAPLETON & HAYES (COSTS) | [2011] FamCAFC 124 |
| FAMILY LAW - APPEAL – Costs application – Non compliance with orders for filing of costs submissions – Application dismissed |
| APPELLANT: | Ms Stapleton |
| RESPONDENT: | Mr Hayes |
| INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: | Legal Aid NSW |
| FILE NUMBER: | SYC | 2750 | of | 2007 |
| APPEAL NUMBER: | EA | 68 | of | 2009 |
| DATE DELIVERED: | 10 June 2011 |
| PLACE DELIVERED: | Brisbane |
| JUDGMENT OF: | Bryant CJ, May & Cronin JJ |
| LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: | Family Court of Australia |
| LOWER COURT JUDGMENT DATE: | 25 May 2009 |
| LOWER COURT MNC: | [2009] FamCA 437 |
REPRESENTATION
| COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT: | Ms Goodchild |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE APPELLANT: | Neisha Shepherd Solicitor |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: | In person |
| COUNSEL FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: | Ms Ward |
| SOLICITOR FOR THE INDEPENDENT CHILDREN’S LAWYER: | Legal Aid NSW |
Orders
There be no order as to costs.
The application by the Independent Children’s Lawyer for costs against the mother is dismissed.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Stapleton & Hayes (Costs) is approved pursuant to s 121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
| THE FULL COURT OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT SYDNEY |
Appeal Number: EA 68 of 2009
File Number: SYC 2750 of 2007
| Ms Stapleton |
Appellant
And
| Mr Hayes |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
On 31 March 2011, for reasons which the Court then delivered, the mother’s appeal against orders made by Moore J on 25 May 2009 was dismissed.
Having dismissed the mother’s appeal, at paragraphs 163 and 166 of the Reasons for Judgment, when discussing the matter of costs, we said:
163.The Independent Children’s Lawyer’s position was that if the appeal was unsuccessful, costs would be sought against the mother because of the filing of the four varying Notices of Appeal and the additional directions hearings that were consequently required.
…
166.… As we do not know what costs are pursued by the Independent Children’s Lawyer against the mother, we propose to make orders that the Independent Children’s Lawyer set out in precise details what orders are sought, such document to be filed within 21 days and for the mother to have a right of reply by written submissions within 14 days thereafter.
The Court then made the following orders in relation to costs:
3.That there be no order as to costs as between the appellant and the respondent.
4.That any application by the Independent Children’s Lawyer for costs against the mother be by way of written submission to be filed and served within 21 days.
5.That insofar as the Independent Children’s Lawyer files any submission seeking costs against the mother, the mother file her written submissions within 14 days after receipt of those of the Independent Children’s Lawyer.
On 3 May 2011, the Eastern Region Appeal Registry, by way of memorandum, notified us that the time for the filing of cost submissions by the Independent Children’s Lawyer had passed and that no submissions had been filed.
In the circumstances of the Independent Children’s Lawyer having filed no written submissions in relation to costs, and it now being out of time, the Independent Children’s Lawyers application for costs is dismissed and the Court will so order.
I certify that the preceding five (5) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Full Court (Bryant CJ, May & Cronin JJ) delivered on 10 June 2011.
Legal Associate:
Date: 10 June 2011
0
0
0