Does anyone have any experience around costs (mainly legal related costs) being awarded to either party relating to enforcement / contravention proceedings for property / financial settlement?
How does the system view such instances of non-compliance to point where enforcements are lodged, then suddenly there is a flurry of activity, but costs have been incurred?
Example scenarios:
*Court Orders in place, Party 1 have not complied with Court Orders within required period. Party 1 contesting Party 2's submitted enforcement orders and is seeking costs associated with contesting the enforcement e.g. lawyer costs
*Court Orders in place, Party 1 have complied with Orders, but not within required period and only following submission by Party 2 of enforcement orders. Party 1 seeking associated costs e.g. lawyer costs, because they have now complied with Order and sees no reason to continue proceedings
*Court Orders in place, Party 1 have complied with Orders, but not within required period and only following submission by Party 2 of enforcement orders. Both parties seeking associated costs e.g. lawyer costs, a) because Party 1 has complied with Orders and sees no reason to continue proceedings b) Party 2 maintains that significant costs that have been incurred due to trying to enforce compliance should be upheld.
How does the system view such instances of non-compliance to point where enforcements are lodged, then suddenly there is a flurry of activity, but costs have been incurred?
Example scenarios:
*Court Orders in place, Party 1 have not complied with Court Orders within required period. Party 1 contesting Party 2's submitted enforcement orders and is seeking costs associated with contesting the enforcement e.g. lawyer costs
*Court Orders in place, Party 1 have complied with Orders, but not within required period and only following submission by Party 2 of enforcement orders. Party 1 seeking associated costs e.g. lawyer costs, because they have now complied with Order and sees no reason to continue proceedings
*Court Orders in place, Party 1 have complied with Orders, but not within required period and only following submission by Party 2 of enforcement orders. Both parties seeking associated costs e.g. lawyer costs, a) because Party 1 has complied with Orders and sees no reason to continue proceedings b) Party 2 maintains that significant costs that have been incurred due to trying to enforce compliance should be upheld.