Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Latest articles
Re A, B and C (Children) [2021] EWCA Civ 451
(Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Macur, Baker, Arnold LJJ, 01 April 2021)Public Law Children – Fact finding – Lucas Direction – Sexual abuse allegations – Judge found...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
HMCTS launches updated online court and tribunal finder
HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has launched an updated version of its online court and tribunal finder tool to help those in search of a court, its location, opening times, disabled access...
NFJO publishes report on supervision orders in care proceedings
The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (NFJO) has published a report following its survey into the use of supervision orders in care proceedings. The survey focused on...
Villiers - the Anglo/Scottish perspective
Heard by the Supreme Court in December 2019, with its judgment last July, this case attracted much interest (or “lurid publicity” as per Mr Justice Mostyn in his judgement this week) as it...
View all articles

Doing the maths: costs orders in the family court

Sep 29, 2018, 18:34 PM
Slug : Bevan-DecFLJ2012
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Dec 11, 2012, 00:33 AM
Article ID : 100983

Chris Bevan

Barrister, KCH Chambers:

The recent decision of the Supreme Court in Re T (Costs: Care Proceedings: Serious Allegation Not Proved) [2012] UKSC 36, [2013] 1 FLR (forthcoming) has returned the issue of costs in family proceedings to the spotlight. In view of the court's judgment, this article asks whether, against a backdrop of imminent and swinging cuts to legal aid, the time has come for the family courts to make greater use of costs orders in both private and public proceedings. In Re T the Court restated the general practice of not awarding costs against a party in family law public proceedings, including against a local authority. The Court made it plain that, in the absence of reprehensible behaviour or an otherwise unreasonable stance by a party, no costs would be granted

Of course, to practitioners, this decision came as no surprise given that unlike other civil proceedings, family law exists as an exception to the accepted principle that 'costs follow the event' (CPR 1998, r 44.3(2)) with the unsuccessful party paying the costs of the successful party. The FPR 2010, r 28.2 expressly excludes the operation of CPR 1998, r 44.3(2) in this regard.

The full version of this article appears in the December 2012 issue of Family Law.

Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from