This decision addresses a request for costs brought by the father (K.D.) against the mother (P.D.) following a child protection trial.
The trial found the child in need of protection due to emotional harm caused by the mother, and custody was granted to the father.
The court applied Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules, noting that the presumption of costs for a successful party does not apply in child protection cases.
While the mother's litigation conduct was deemed unreasonable and prolonged the trial, the court found it did not constitute "bad faith" under Rule 24(8) because her actions stemmed from a fixed belief related to a personality disorder, rather than an intent to inflict financial or emotional harm.
Consequently, the father was awarded partial indemnity costs, significantly less than the full recovery sought, reflecting the mother's unreasonable behaviour but not bad faith.
