Aish and Greco

[2014] FCCA 2283

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AISH & GRECO [2014] FCCA 2283

Catchwords:
FAMILY LAW – Application for review of child support back to 2006 – objection decision only recently published – SSAT appeal still possible – whether appropriate for mother to proceed in the Court – whether application having reasonable prospects of success – application dismissed.

Legislation:  

Family Law Act 1975, ss.64, 66BA, 66E, 66F, 74, 90SE, 117
Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, ss.111, 112, 117, 123
Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988
Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999, s.17A
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, Order 13(10)

Henry v Henry (1996) 135 ALR 564
Love & Henderson (1996) FLC 92-653
Cutler & Lester [2007] FMCAfam 563
JFL v TP (1999) FLC 92-870

Applicant: MR AISH

Respondent: MS GRECO

File Number: NCC 192 of 2007

Judgment of: Judge Burchardt

Hearing date: 29 August 2014

Date of Last Submission: 29 August 2014

Delivered at: Melbourne

Delivered on: 2 September 2014

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Bacon

Solicitors for the Applicant: Manby & Scott Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondent: Ms Devine

Solicitors for the Respondent: Merrick Spicer & Associates

ORDERS

1. The Applications filed on 9 October 2013 be dismissed.

2. Each party is to bear their own costs.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Aish & Greco is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA

AT MELBOURNE

NCC 192 of 2007

MR AISH

Applicant

And

MS GRECO

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. It is appropriate to commence judgment in this matter by starting with the materials that the parties have actually filed.  The father’s initiating application filed on 9 October 2013 sought final orders in the following terms:

   “1.From the date of these orders and until a child support terminating event occurs in relation to the children [X] (born [omitted] 2001), [Y] (born [omitted] 2003) and [Z] (born [omitted] 2004) (the children) any monies paid by the applicant to third parties for purposes directly related to the children’s dental, healthcare and contact travel costs (up to $100 per week) be credited as an appropriate percentage against any child support otherwise payable by the applicant to the respondent regarding the children. 

   2.The applicant be declared to have had a lawful duty to maintain Ms A from 30 August 2006 and that that duty be duly quantified.

   3.Any leave required to be given in these proceedings for them to proceed (within the Child Support Agency) under s112 Child Support (Assessment) Act (or otherwise) be so given.

   4.Any further order [whether under the Family Law Act, Child Support Assessment or otherwise] required to do justice between the parties.

   5.The respondent pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to these proceedings.”

2. On page 5 of the application, it was noted that there were no ongoing cases about child support, and on page 3 of the application I note that the date of…