Tappert & Tappert (No 2)

In *Tappert & Tappert (No 2)*, the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife for costs against the husband. The dispute arose from the husband's conduct, which the wife alleged led to substantial costs being incurred. The husband failed to file a response to the wife's application for costs.

The court was required to determine whether to award costs to the wife and, if so, the appropriate amount. A key issue was whether the court had the discretion to fix a lump sum for costs without a formal assessment or taxation, and the principles governing such a determination. The court also considered the wife's previous without prejudice offers to settle the matter of costs, and the husband's failure to respond to these offers.

Judge McNab reasoned that the court possesses a discretion to award a lump sum for costs without formal assessment, citing established case law. The court is not bound by a scientific or formulaic approach when fixing such a sum, but must act logically, fairly, and reasonably. The wife had made two without prejudice offers to settle costs, which the husband did not respond to. The court noted that the final orders did not deliver a greater benefit to the wife than what was offered in her initial settlement proposal.

The court ordered that the respondent husband pay the applicant wife's costs, fixed in the sum of $31,641.00, to be paid by 4:00 pm on 16 February 2021.