Thrussell & Thrussell (No 2)

This matter concerned an application by the respondent, Mr. Thrussell, for an order that the applicant, Ms. Thrussell, pay his costs of and incidental to the proceedings. The parties were formerly married and the proceedings concerned the division of their matrimonial assets. The dispute over costs arose following the finalisation of the property settlement, where the court had made orders for the division of assets.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the respondent had been successful in the substantive proceedings to such an extent that he should be awarded his costs against the applicant. Specifically, the court had to consider the principles governing the award of costs in family law proceedings, particularly in circumstances where neither party had achieved a complete victory. The court was required to assess the overall outcome of the property settlement in light of the parties' respective conduct and the offers of settlement made during the litigation.

Hartnett J noted that costs in family law matters are discretionary and are generally awarded on the principle that costs follow the event, unless there are good reasons to depart from that principle. His Honour considered the offers of settlement made by both parties and the extent to which each party had succeeded in achieving their stated objectives in the property proceedings. The court found that while the respondent had achieved a significant portion of what he sought, the applicant had also achieved substantial success in her claims. Consequently, His Honour determined that neither party had been wholly successful and that it would be unjust to depart from the usual rule that each party should bear their own costs.

Accordingly, the court ordered that each party should bear their own costs of and incidental to the proceedings.