Summerfield and Summerfield

In *Summerfield and Summerfield*, heard by O'Ryan J, the proceedings concerned an application by the Wife for costs following final orders made on 23 November 2006. The Wife had filed a Response on 18 January 2007, which was subsequently dismissed.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the Wife should be ordered to pay a portion of the Husband's costs of and incidental to the proceedings. This required the court to consider the conduct of the parties in the litigation and whether it warranted a departure from the usual rule that costs follow the event.

O'Ryan J reasoned that the Wife's conduct in filing the Response on 18 January 2007 was unreasonable and had caused unnecessary costs to the Husband. Applying the principles of costs orders in family law matters, which allow for discretion to depart from the usual rule where a party's conduct has been vexatious or caused undue delay or expense, the court found that an order for costs against the Wife was justified.

Consequently, the court ordered that the Wife pay a portion of the Husband’s costs, specifically the sum of $100,000, to be paid by 4.00 pm on 9 October 2007. The Wife's Response filed on 18 January 2007 was dismissed.