Turner & Alexander (No 2)

In *Turner & Alexander (No 2)*, the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the father for fixed costs of $44,587.35, or alternatively, costs to be assessed, arising from parenting proceedings. The mother opposed the application. The court had previously made final parenting orders, granting the father sole parental responsibility for the children, with the children to live with him and have limited time with the mother. The primary dispute before the court concerned the father's application for costs.

The central legal issue was whether the circumstances of the case justified an order for costs against the mother, and if so, what the quantum of that order should be. The court was required to consider the factors outlined in section 117(2A) of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), including the financial circumstances of the parties, the conduct of the proceedings, whether a party was wholly unsuccessful, and any offers to settle. The court also had to determine if the general rule that parties bear their own costs should be departed from in this parenting matter.

The court found that while the parties' financial circumstances did not preclude an order for costs, they were relevant to determining the quantum. Crucially, the court noted significant adverse findings regarding the mother's credit and the untruthful nature of her and her husband's evidence, which contributed to the protracted nature of the proceedings. The mother was found to be wholly unsuccessful on the primary issues of the children's living arrangements and contact with her husband, a registered sex offender. The court also considered the mother's failure to disclose her husband's criminal history and her minimisation of the offences, as well as her conduct in prioritising her relationship with her husband over her child's wishes. These factors, particularly the mother's conduct and her lack of success, justified departing from the usual costs rule.

The court ordered the mother to pay the father's costs, but not in the full amount sought. The court determined that while the mother's conduct warranted a costs order, the quantum should be less than the father's fixed costs application, indicating a partial success for the father in his costs claim.