In a significant development following a landmark legal battle, the State of Western Australia has been ordered to cover the substantial legal costs of a former ward and child sexual abuse survivor.
Costs Order Adds to State's Financial Burden
On Friday, 28 November 2025, District Court Judge Linda Black ruled that the State must pay the legal costs of Dion Barber on a 'party/party' basis. This decision comes after Mr Barber's successful compensation claim earlier this year, where he was awarded $2.85 million in damages for the horrific abuse he suffered as a child under state care.
Mr Barber's lawyer, Hugo Seymour of Maurice Blackburne, revealed that the costs order was triggered because his client had made a settlement offer of $1.2 million in June 2024, which the State rejected. 'The judge has awarded they need to pay all of that from the date of the offer,' Mr Seymour told reporters.
A History of Systemic Failure
The 45-year-old Mr Barber first bravely disclosed the abuse he suffered at just eight years old in 1988. Despite his stepfather's crimes being acknowledged by welfare authorities in the Children's Court, Mr Barber was returned to the family home months later, where the abuse resumed along with physical and verbal attacks.
Judge Black described the situation as an 'abject dereliction of duty' by the state. The systemic failures continued as Mr Barber faced further violations in various other state placements, including with his maternal grandparents and his now deceased biological father.
Ongoing Legal Battle and Political Response
While the State is currently appealing the $2.85 million damages award, Premier Roger Cook has insisted the appeal is merely to clarify certain aspects of the law and that Mr Barber will receive his full compensation regardless of the outcome.
When questioned about whether the State might also appeal the costs ruling, Mr Seymour responded simply: 'That's up to them.' The legal costs are expected to be substantial, with lawyers for successful parties typically recovering between half to two-thirds of their fees.
This case represents a continuing accountability process for historical child protection failures in Western Australia, with the costs order adding further financial consequence to the State's dereliction of duty.
