Twigg v Twigg (No 2)

In the Family Court of Australia, Twigg v Twigg (No 2) dealt with an interlocutory application concerning costs in a dispute between the parties, Twigg and Twigg. The central issue was whether a consent order made by the parties for costs to be assessable forthwith also meant that the costs were payable forthwith. The case arose from proceedings for a financial settlement following the breakdown of the parties' marriage.

The legal issue before the court was whether the consent order, which provided that costs were to be assessed forthwith, also mandated that the costs were payable forthwith. The court had to determine the precise meaning of "forthwith" in this context and whether it applied to both the assessment and payment of costs. The case hinged on interpreting the language of the consent order and understanding the implications of the term "forthwith" as used in the context of both assessment and payment of costs.

The court found that the term "forthwith" in the consent order referred only to the assessment of costs and did not extend to the payment of those costs. The order for costs to be assessable forthwith did not imply that the costs were also payable forthwith. The court emphasised that the terms of the consent order needed to be interpreted in their ordinary and natural meaning. The use of "forthwith" in relation to assessment did not extend to payment unless explicitly stated. Consequently, the court ruled that the costs were assessable forthwith but not necessarily payable forthwith. The court's decision clarified the distinction between assessment and payment of costs in the context of consent orders.