A (Appeal: Costs), Re
[2024] EWHC 2218 (Fam)
SP v WR & Anor (No 2) (Costs)
11 June 2024
[2024] EWFC 140 (B)
Family Court
A dad and mom were in court over their child. The judge found the dad acted badly, making the case more expensive. So, the judge made the dad pay the mom some of her legal bills from the final court hearing, even though the usual rules about who pays are different in family cases. The judge thought the dad's bad behaviour made the final hearing 50% more costly than it should have been.
Key Facts
- •Costs dispute in family proceedings (SP v WR & Anor [2024] EWFC 93 (B)).
- •Respondent mother (WR) sought costs order against applicant father (SP).
- •WR claimed £121,179.31 (total) or £61,088.40 (final hearing) in costs.
- •SP's costs were estimated at £49,750, though he mentioned total costs close to £211,000.
- •Judge considered FPR Part 28 and PD28A, noting the 'loser pays' rule is disapplied in children proceedings.
- •Judge found SP's conduct during the final hearing to be unreasonable and reprehensible.
- •Judge considered SP's financial position but found it didn't preclude a costs order.
- •Judge ordered SP to pay WR £24,400 in costs for the final hearing, representing 50% of WR's claim after deductions.
Legal Principles
In children proceedings, the 'loser pays' rule is disapplied; the focus is on the child's best interests.
FPR Part 28 and PD28A; Re O (Appeal: Costs) [2024] EWHC 1163 (Fam)
The court can make a costs order, considering conduct of parties, partial success, and settlement offers (CPR r.44).
CPR r.44
Unreasonable or reprehensible conduct is a gateway to a costs order but not a determinant.
Re T (Children) [2012] UKSC 36; The Mother v The Father [2023] EWHC 2078 (Fam)
Outcomes
Costs order made against SP in favour of WR.
SP's unreasonable and reprehensible conduct during the final hearing significantly increased costs. The judge assessed this contribution at 50% of the final hearing costs.
SP to pay WR £24,400.
This sum represents 50% of WR's claimed final hearing costs (£61,000), reduced by 20% to account for potential reductions in a detailed assessment.