Tarelli and Langley and Anor (No 2)
Case
•
[2018] FamCA 768
•26 September 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Tarelli and Langley and Anor (No 2) [2018] FamCA 768
[2018] FamCA 768
26 September 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This decision of Cleary J in the Family Court of Australia concerned a dispute between Mr Tarelli (the father) and Ms Langley (the mother) regarding costs and further applications following earlier proceedings. The mother had sought to re-open proceedings, which the father opposed.
The court was required to determine the costs associated with the mother's application to re-open proceedings and to consider several other applications filed by both the father and a third party, RR Pty Ltd. These included the father's response to an application and two further applications, as well as the mother's application for a stay and the father's application for enforcement.
Cleary J ordered that the mother pay the father's costs for the contested application to re-open proceedings, with these costs to be charged upon any assets received by the mother from the final orders made on 27 June 2018 or from any appeal from those orders. The father's other applications were dismissed. Several remaining applications, including those from RR Pty Ltd, the mother for a stay, and the father for enforcement, were listed for future hearing or directions.
The court was required to determine the costs associated with the mother's application to re-open proceedings and to consider several other applications filed by both the father and a third party, RR Pty Ltd. These included the father's response to an application and two further applications, as well as the mother's application for a stay and the father's application for enforcement.
Cleary J ordered that the mother pay the father's costs for the contested application to re-open proceedings, with these costs to be charged upon any assets received by the mother from the final orders made on 27 June 2018 or from any appeal from those orders. The father's other applications were dismissed. Several remaining applications, including those from RR Pty Ltd, the mother for a stay, and the father for enforcement, were listed for future hearing or directions.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Appeal
-
Stay of Proceedings
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1