Stone & Stone
Case
•
[2015] FamCAFC 18
•19 February 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Stone & Stone [2015] FamCAFC 18
[2015] FamCAFC 18
19 February 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Stone & Stone was an appeal brought by a husband against property and costs orders made in relation to the divorce of the parties. The appeal was brought before the Family Court of Australia. The husband sought to appeal against the property and costs orders made by Fowler J on 18 April 2013 and 19 June 2013, respectively. The primary issues for determination were whether the trial judge erred in making the orders in question and whether the husband's appeal should be dismissed.
The court held that the husband's appeal should be dismissed. The trial judge had exercised their discretion correctly in making the orders, and there was no error in law or fact that warranted the appeal being upheld. The court further held that the husband's appeal against the costs orders was also without merit. The trial judge had acted within their discretion in making the costs orders, and there was no basis to interfere with those orders on appeal. The court held that the husband should pay the wife's costs of and incidental to the appeals as agreed between the parties or assessed, such costs to be paid twenty eight days after agreement or assessment. The application in an appeal filed by the husband on 22 October 2014 was also dismissed, and the husband was ordered to pay the wife's costs of and incidental to the application as agreed between the parties or assessed, such costs to be paid twenty eight days after agreement or assessment.
The court held that the husband's appeal should be dismissed. The trial judge had exercised their discretion correctly in making the orders, and there was no error in law or fact that warranted the appeal being upheld. The court further held that the husband's appeal against the costs orders was also without merit. The trial judge had acted within their discretion in making the costs orders, and there was no basis to interfere with those orders on appeal. The court held that the husband should pay the wife's costs of and incidental to the appeals as agreed between the parties or assessed, such costs to be paid twenty eight days after agreement or assessment. The application in an appeal filed by the husband on 22 October 2014 was also dismissed, and the husband was ordered to pay the wife's costs of and incidental to the application as agreed between the parties or assessed, such costs to be paid twenty eight days after agreement or assessment.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Costs
-
Res Judicata
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Stone & Stone [2015] FamCAFC 18
Most Recent Citation
Huang & Wen (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1F 71
Cases Citing This Decision
20
BALKEN & VYNER
[2020] FamCA 955
BENCE & BENCE
[2020] FamCA 748
Lotta & Lotta
[2017] FamCA 50
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
2
Norbis v Norbis
[1986] HCA 17
Norbis v Norbis
[1986] HCA 17
Steinbrenner & Steinbrenner
[2008] FamCAFC 193