Abner and Abner (No. 2)

In *Abner and Abner (No. 2)*, Loughnan J of the Family Court of Australia considered competing applications for departure from a child support assessment. The mother sought an increased child support payment from the father, while the father sought to have his child support liability reduced to $0 and instead be liable for the children's school fees. The court also considered the mother's application for the father to pay school fees and expenses in addition to periodic child support, and the father's counter-application to pay school fees and expenses in lieu of periodic child support.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether there were special circumstances to ground a departure order from the child support assessment, and if so, whether it would be just and equitable to make such an order. The court was also required to determine whether it was in the best interests of the children to grant an injunction restraining the parents from discussing financial matters related to child support and school fees with them.

Loughnan J found that while there may have been grounds for departure from the child support assessment, it would not be just and equitable to do so. The court noted that neither party could afford to pay private school fees from their income. Consequently, the applications for departure and for payment of child support in a form other than periodic payments were dismissed. However, the court ordered that the private school fees and related expenses for one child be met from the proceeds of sale of company shares held in the father's name, with this payment not reducing the father's assessed child support liability. Furthermore, an injunction was granted under s 68B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) restraining both parents from discussing the apportionment of school fees or the rate of child support with the children, given that one child had already been exposed to their financial disputes.