ACORA & SADLOWS

The applicant, ACORA, sought a stay of a departure order granted by the Child Support Registrar, which had increased the child support payable for two children aged 10 and 14. The dispute involved a history of multiple orders made between 2007 and 2020, previous unsuccessful interim stay applications, and withdrawn contravention applications. The applicant's current request for sole parental responsibility represented a reversal of prior final consent orders. The applicant had also contested the Tribunal's decision to proceed in his absence and had initially sought to appeal the Tribunal's decision, though this appeal was later discontinued.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant a stay of the departure order. This required the court to consider the applicant's claim for sole parental responsibility, particularly in relation to financial decisions concerning a child's education, and how this interacted with the existing legislative framework. The court also had to determine the meaning of "parental responsibility" within the context of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth) and its harmonious operation with the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth) and the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988* (Cth).

Judge A Kelly reasoned that the term "duties" within the definition of parental responsibility should be interpreted to include the primary duty imposed on parents by s 3(1) of the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth) to maintain their child. The court found that a harmonious operation of the relevant legislation necessitated this interpretation. Consequently, the application for a stay was dismissed.

The application was dismissed. The applicant was ordered to file and serve any further amended initiating application for a departure order by 4:00pm on Tuesday, 30 June 2020, and the respondent was to file and serve any further amended response by 4:00pm on Tuesday, 14 July 2020. Liberty to apply was granted, and costs were reserved.