Event and Time
Event Description
In the case of Fernsby & Zhao, the husband (Mr. Fernsby) appealed a final property settlement order made against him. The appeal was dismissed, leading the wife (Ms. Zhao) to seek costs for the appeal process.
Application and Claims
- The wife sought her appeal costs on an indemnity basis (approximately $50,616.50) or alternatively, on a party/party basis fixed at $24,185.67.
- The husband opposed any costs order, asserting that under section 117 of the Family Law Act 1975, each party should bear their own costs.
Judicial Decisions
The court determined that the husband should pay the wife’s costs on a party/party basis, fixed at $15,000, due to the appeal being devoid of merit and the history of the proceedings.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Wife's Position:
- Cited offers of settlement made to the husband prior to the appeal, indicating her willingness to resolve the matter amicably. - Argued the husband's conduct warranted indemnity costs, specifically mentioning his failure to timely file an Amended Notice of Appeal which resulted in unnecessary costs. - Presented financial hardships, claiming her weekly expenses exceeded her income.
- Husband's Position:
- Contended that the appeal was valid and that costs should be borne by both parties as per section 117 (1) of the Family Law Act 1975. - Argued that the delay in filing the Amended Notice of Appeal was minor (5-6 hours) and not significant enough to warrant a costs order. - Presented limited evidence regarding the wife acting as a shadow director, which he claimed affected her financial disclosure.
Ruling and Impact
Ruling Result
The court ruled that the husband was to pay the wife $15,000 for party/party costs, reflecting the appeal's meritlessness.