H v W

Order 62 r. 3 of the Rules of the Supreme Court (Northern Ireland) 1980 provides as follows:

In Gojkovic v Gojkovic (No. 2) (1992) 1 AER 267 Butler-Sloss J (as she then was) set out principles governing the conventional approach to costs as follows:

(ii) In GW v RW (2003) 2 FCR 289 , Mr Mostyn QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, reviewed in detail the current costs regime that obtains in England and Wales. After revisiting the principle that the safe starting point in big money cases is that there should be no order to costs, he went on to offer some comments on exceptions to that approach. At paragraph 96 he said:

(ii) Dealing first with the costs on the ancillary relief/Article 29 application, I consider that the costs incurred in the ancillary relief, but not those costs incurred in the application under Article 29 of the 1978 Order, should be awarded to the wife for the following reasons:

(c) In a needs based approach, the court must be wary to ensure that an award of costs does not become disproportionate to the effect of the order made. If this wife was to bear her own costs, I believe it would have a disproportionate effect on the award that I have made and would render her needs inappropriately provided for. That in itself would have pointed towards an award of costs to her on the basis that I have determined.