ZANDAS & ZANDAS

In the Family Court of Australia, Judge Scarlett considered an application for property orders where the Respondent also sought parenting orders, with the matter listed for a final hearing. The Applicant's case was found to be unprepared, resulting in the waste of two days of court time.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the Applicant should be ordered to pay the Respondent's costs for the two hearing days that were rendered nugatory, and if so, whether those costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis. Furthermore, the court was required to consider the conduct of the Applicant's counsel and solicitor in relation to their handling of the case and an undertaking given to the Court.

Judge Scarlett reasoned that the Applicant's failure to present their case, despite being afforded ample opportunity, constituted a significant waste of judicial resources and caused prejudice to the Respondent. The court found that the conduct of the Applicant's legal representatives, including a failure to honour an undertaking to the Court, warranted a strong response. Consequently, the court ordered that the Applicant pay the Respondent's costs thrown away on an indemnity basis. The Principal Registrar was also directed to forward the reasons for decision to the Office of the Legal Services Commissioner for investigation into the professional conduct of the Applicant's barrister.