Surridge and Surridge and Anor

Link copied
Case Copied 18 min read

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SURRIDGE & SURRIDGE & ANOR [2016] FamCA 615
FAMILY LAW – COSTS – where enforcement application for child support arrears – where application for husband to procure removal of caveat over property lodged in breach of orders – where consideration of general principles – where husband to pay 80 per cent of wife’s costs as assessed or agreed.
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 117

Hawkins & Roe [2012] FamCAFC
Penfold v Penfold (1980) 144 CLR 311
Surridge & Surridge  [2015] FamCA 493
Surridge & Surridge [2015] FamCA 755

APPLICANT: Ms Surridge
1st RESPONDENT: Mr Surridge
2nd RESPONDENT: Mr Q
FILE NUMBER: PAC 4412 of 2012
DATE DELIVERED: 29 July 2016
PLACE DELIVERED: Parramatta
PLACE HEARD: Parramatta
JUDGMENT OF: Foster J
HEARING DATE: 24 June 2016

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: Ms Gillies
SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Matthews Folbigg Pty Ltd
SOLICITOR FOR THE 1ST RESPONDENT: Tilley Family Law and Mediation
SOLICITOR FOR THE 4TH RESPONDENT: Tilley Family Law and Mediation

Orders

  1. That the husband pay 80 per cent of the wife’s costs on a party/party basis as assessed or agreed in relation to the subject proceedings within 2 months from such assessment or agreement.

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 Surridge & Surridge and Anor 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 PARRAMATTA

FILE NUMBER: PAC 4412  of 2012

Ms Surridge

Applicant

And

Mr Surridge and Mr Q

Respondents

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

  1. Property proceedings between the husband and wife were the subject of orders made on 29 June 2015 (Surridge & Surridge  [2015] FamCA 493).

  2. Those orders provided:

    By Consent:

    (1)      That the parties forthwith do all acts and things and sign all documents to cause the following things to occur with respect to the company [B Pty Ltd]:

    (a)      The 2013 and 2014 statements of financial position to be amended so as to consolidate into one loan account in the joint names of the parties all advances and loan accounts of the parties reported in the statements of financial position;

    (b)      Dividends then to be declared to each of the parties fully franked for each of the following financial years:

    (i)       For the 2013 financial year $37,479 imputation credit and $87,452 franked amount;

    (ii)      For the 2014 financial year $15,366 imputation credit and $35,855 franked amount;

    (iii)     For the 2015 financial year $115,505 fully franked;

    (c)       That on the dividends being declared and the 2015 financial statements and tax return prepared…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Surridge and Surridge and Anor and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2016] FamCA 615
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of *Surridge and Surridge and Anor*, Foster J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application concerning costs. The proceedings involved a dispute between a husband and a wife, with the wife being the applicant for costs.

The central legal issue before the court was the appropriate allocation of costs between the parties following the conclusion of the subject proceedings. Specifically, the court was required to determine the proportion of the wife's costs that the husband should be ordered to pay on a party/party basis.

Foster J ordered that the husband pay 80 per cent of the wife’s costs on a party/party basis. These costs are to be assessed or agreed upon and paid by the husband within two months of such assessment or agreement.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

That the husband pay 80 per cent of the wife’s costs on a party/party basis as assessed or agreed in relation to the subject proceedings within 2 months from such assessment or agreement.

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

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.