WILLIAMS and Hatheway (No 2)

In *Williams and Hatheway (No 2)*, Rees J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application for costs by the Independent Children’s Lawyer (ICL) in substantive family law proceedings. The mother had previously been ordered to pay half of the ICL's costs, while the father was granted leave to apply to the Legal Aid Commission of NSW (LAC) for a waiver of his portion of these fees. This application to the LAC was unsuccessful.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the father should be ordered to pay the outstanding costs of the ICL, given his prior application for a waiver had been refused and he had not provided further financial information to the court. The court was also required to determine the appropriate quantum of costs to be ordered against the father.

Rees J reasoned that the father had been found to be employed during the substantive proceedings, indicating a capacity to contribute to the costs. The refusal of his application to the LAC meant that the obligation to pay the ICL's costs remained. The court applied the general principle that parties should bear the costs of litigation, particularly where they have the means to do so.

Consequently, the court ordered that the father pay the sum of $6,836 to the Legal Aid Commission of NSW on account of the costs of the Independent Children’s Lawyer, with this payment to be made no later than 11 October 2019.