Wood and Muller (No 2)

In *Wood and Muller (No 2)*, Johns J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia was required to determine an application for costs following earlier proceedings between the parties. The dispute concerned the wife's entitlement to an indemnity costs order against the husband.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the husband's conduct warranted the exercise of discretion to award costs on an indemnity basis. This involved considering whether the husband's actions had been unreasonable or vexatious, thereby justifying a departure from the usual order for costs to be assessed on a party and party basis.

Johns J reasoned that the husband's conduct throughout the proceedings had been unreasonable, particularly in relation to his failure to comply with court orders and his pursuit of certain applications. The court applied the principles governing indemnity costs, which require a higher threshold of unreasonableness than that needed for ordinary costs. The judge found that the husband's conduct met this threshold, justifying the award of indemnity costs to the wife.

Consequently, the court ordered that the husband pay the wife's costs of and incidental to the proceedings on an indemnity basis, fixed at $18,285.64, and that all other extant applications be dismissed.