FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| WILTON & WILTON | [2016] FCCA 1123 |
| Catchwords: FAMILY LAW – Application for costs following summary dismissal of a child support application – where the respondent seeks indemnity costs against the applicant and his solicitor – consideration of the factors in s.117(2A) – where father was wholly unsuccessful – consideration of the conduct of the father and his solicitor – where proceedings were commenced in the state Magistrates’ Court. |
| Legislation: Family Law Act 1975 ss.117(1), 117(2), 117(2A) Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 rr.21.02, 21.07 |
| Cases cited: Lilley & CSR & Ors (SSAT Appeal) [2010] FMCAfam 378 |
| Applicant: | MR WILTON |
| Respondent: | MS WILTON |
| File Number: | DGC1120/2007 |
| Judgment of: | Judge Williams |
| Hearing date: | 6 April 2016 |
| Date of Last Submission: | 15 April 2016 |
| Delivered at: | Melbourne |
| Delivered on: | 13 May 2016 |
REPRESENTATION
| Counsel for the Applicant: | Mr Bacon, Solicitor |
| Solicitors for the Applicant: | Manby & Scott |
| Counsel for the Respondent: | Ms Tulloch |
| Solicitors for the Respondent: | JH Legal |
ORDERS
The applicant father pay the respondent mother’s costs of and incidental to the proceedings fixed at $6761.00 within 28 days.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Wilton & Wilton is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).
| FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE |
DGC 1120 of 2007
| MR WILTON |
Applicant
And
| MS WILTON |
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction
This is an application for costs by the respondent mother, resulting from the summary dismissal of the applicant father’s Initiating Application filed on 23 October 2015 in the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria at Melbourne (“Magistrates’ Court”).
Background
The parties were married on … 1984 and separated on 20 October 2001. There are two children of the marriage, Ms A born on … 1996, currently aged 20 and [X] born on … 1999 and currently aged 17.
The applicant father is aged 58 and is employed as a professional with the Employer. In his financial statement filed 23 October 2015 he deposes to an income of $106,000 per annum. The respondent mother is aged 53 years and is employed as a part time public servant at Employer in Suburb B. Her affidavit sworn 15 December 2015[1] states that her income is $38,000 per annum.
[1] paragraph 2 of the affidavit of the mother sworn 15 December 2015
On the 23 February 2004 Final Property Orders were made by consent before Her Honour, as she was then, Federal Magistrate Hartnett.
On 23 October 2015 the applicant father filed an Initiating Application in the Magistrates’ Court at Melbourne. In support of that application he filed an Affidavit and a Financial Statement both sworn on 23 October 2015.
On 17 December 2015…
Continue reading Wilton and Wilton
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Wilton and Wilton [2016] FCCA 1123
- Case
- [2016] FCCA 1123
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was the determination of the quantum of costs to be awarded to the respondent mother and the timeframe for their payment by the applicant father.
Judge Williams ordered the applicant father to pay the respondent mother's costs fixed at $6761.00, with payment due within 28 days.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The applicant father pay the respondent mother’s costs of and incidental to the proceedings fixed at $6761.00 within 28 days.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.