Arterton and Windeatt (Child support) - [2024] ARTA 199

Arterton and Windeatt (Child support) [2024] ARTA 199 (7 November 2024)

Applicant/s: Ms Arterton

Respondent: Child Support Registrar

Other Parties: Mr Windeatt

Tribunal Number: 2024/MC028130
2024/MC028217
2024/MC028218

Tribunal: Senior Member J Longo
Place:Melbourne
Date:07 November 2024
Decision:

The decisions under review are set aside and decisions substituted as follows:

· That Ms Arterton’s percentage of care for [Child 1] and [Child 2] is 80% and Mr Windeatt’s percentage of care for [Child 1] and [Child 2] is 20% applying from 1 March 2023 and not 15 September 2022.
· That subsection 87AA(1) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 applies as if the reference to 28 days in that subsection were a reference to a longer period extending to 12 April 2024 in relation to the care percentage decision applying from 1 March 2023.
· The existing percentage of care determinations for [Child 2] of 72% for Ms Arterton and 28% for Mr Windeatt are revoked from 4 February 2024 with percentage of care determinations for [Child 2] of 65% for Ms Arterton and 35% for Mr Windeatt applying from 5 February 2024. The existing percentage of care determinations for [Child 1] of 65% for Ms Arterton and 35% for Mr Windeatt are not revoked.

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – changes to the pattern of care – existing percentage of care determinations revoked – new determinations made – back end date of effect – special circumstances preventing the objection – decision under review set aside and substituted

Names used in all published decisions are pseudonyms. Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision and replaced with generic information pursuant to subsection 16(2AB) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

Statement of Reasons

BACKGROUND

Mr Windeatt and Ms Arterton are the parents of [Child 2] (born 2021) and [Child 1] (born 2016). This application concerns decisions by the Child Support Registrar (Child Support) about the percentages of care attributed to Mr Windeatt and Ms Arterton for the children, initially in the registration of the child support liability for the child support case commencing from 1 March 2023 and the date of effect of this decision and then a subsequent determination of the percentages of care from 23 February 2024.
On 16 March 2023, Child Support decided to accept an application for assessment of child support by Ms Arterton and determined percentages of care of 100% for Ms Arterton and 0% for Mr Windeatt of the children from 15 September 2022 effective in the child support case from 1 March 2023.
On 12 April 2024, Mr Windeatt objected to this decision made on 16 March 2023. On 16 June 2024, a Child Support objections officer allowed the objection and determined percentages of care of 50% for Ms Arterton and 50% for Mr Windeatt of the children from 15 September 2022 effective in the child support case from 1 March 2023.
Subsequently, a change in care was advised with new percentage of care determinations made for each parent as follows:
[Child 2]
(a)         72% care for Ms Arterton from 7 June 2023
(b)         28% care for Mr Windeatt from 7 June 2023
[Child 1]
(a)         65% care for Ms Arterton from 7 June 2023
(b)         35% care for Mr Windeatt from 7 June 2023
On 23 February 2024 Mr Windeatt notified Child Support that the care of the children was that Ms Arterton had 57% care and Mr Windeatt had 43% care from 5 February 2024. On 12 April 2024, Child Support made a new determination of the care with Ms Arterton having 57% care and Mr Windeatt having 43% care from 5 February 2024.
On 16 April 2024, Ms Arterton objected to the decision made on 23 February 2024. On 22 June 2024, a Child Support objections officer allowed the objection and refused to make a change to the care determination with the percentages of care for each parent for each child therefore remaining as set out in paragraph 4 of these Reasons.

On 26 June 2024 and 4 July 2024, Ms Arterton lodged applications with the Tribunal seeking an independent review of Child Support’s decisions of 16 June 20224 and 22 June 2024 respectively, stating that the decisions of Child Support did not reflect the actual care during the period.

The hearing of the application was held on 24 September 2024. Mr Windeatt attended the hearing in person and Ms Arterton participated by conference telephone. Both gave evidence on affirmation.
In considering the application, I took into account the oral evidence of Ms Arterton and Mr Windeatt and the documentary material provided by Child Support to the Tribunal, Ms Arterton and Mr Windeatt.[1] I also took into account the documents provided by Ms Arterton[2] and Mr Windeatt[3] (marked Exhibit B, pages B1 to B27).
[1] Pages 1 to 372 (2024/MC028130); 1 to 352 (2024/MC028218); and 1 to 388 (2024/MC028217) of documents provided by Child Support.
[2] Pages A1 to A26.
[3] Pages B1 to B31.
From 14 October 2024, the AAT became the Administrative Review Tribunal (the Tribunal). Under the transitional provisions in the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (the Transitional Act), applications for review to the AAT that were not finalised before 14 October 2024 are taken to be an application for review to the Tribunal. This also applies to decisions not finalised before 14 October 2024 being taken to be decisions of the Tribunal. The Transitional Act gives the Tribunal the authority to continue and finalise any aspect of the review not already completed by the AAT. This decision and statement of reasons is made by the Tribunal.

ISSUES

The statutory provisions relevant to this review are contained in the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (the Act) and the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (the Registration and Collection Act). The legislation provides Child Support with rules for assessing and changing percentage care determinations which are then used as part of the child support formula to assess child support rates.
In reviewing this decision, I also had regard to the Child Support Guide (the Guide) where relevant. The Guide contains governmental guidelines and policy as to how the legislation is to be applied. I acknowledges that, whilst I may be guided by policy, I am not bound to follow it: Re Drake and Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs(No 2) (1979) 2 ALD 634. In the case of G v MIBP [2018] FCA 1229, the Federal Court observed that it is clear from earlier authorities, that in the absence of any statutory indication to the contrary, any lawful executive policy enacted to guide the exercise of a statutory power is a relevant factor for me to take into account in performing the review task. A lawful approach allows the adoption of appropriate policy as a guide but not so as to control the making of the decision and I adopt that approach.
The issues to be determined are the percentages of care for Ms Arterton and Mr Windeatt to be recorded at the date the application was registered with Child Support; whether there was a change in the care percentages for each parent; and from when those percentage of care determinations apply based on when Child Support was notified.

CONSIDERATION

What care determination should apply from the date of application for registration?

Sections 7A, 25, 49 and 50 of the Act provide for new care decisions to be made. Section 25 stipulates that an application for a new care decision can only be made if ‘the applicant is not living with the other parent as his or her partner on a genuine domestic basis’. Section 7A states that the new care period commences on the date of application for assessment.
The Registration Act allows a person who is entitled to receive child support, under section 30 of the Registration Act, to register a registrable maintenance liability on the Child Support Register. The Child Support Registrar is then required to make a decision to refuse or accept an application. Once accepted, a determination of the particulars of the assessment is made to determine the child support payable. One of the particulars that is determined is the care percentages that should apply for the child or the children of the eligible carers. Ms Arterton made such an application to Child Support on 1 March 2023.
Ms Arterton stated at the hearing that she and Mr Windeatt separated on approximately 15 September 2022 and Mr Windeatt stopped living at the property in [Suburb 1]. She stated that he would return in the morning and afternoon to assist with the children – in the morning he would assist with getting the children ready and then take the children to child care and to school, which was nearby Mr Windeatt’s work. Ms Arterton stated that she was working on Monday, Wednesday and Thursday and at home the other weekdays and on these days [Child 2] was at home.
Ms Arterton stated that Mr Windeatt would usually collect the children from school and child care on the days she was working and stay with the children until she returned home from work. At the beginning of their separation, he would stay until the children went to sleep but this stopped after some time and he would leave after she got home. This changed again in November 2022, and she was taking the children to school and child care in the morning as Mr Windeatt stopped doing this. Ms Arterton stated that Mr Windeatt was living elsewhere and did not stay at the [Suburb 1] premises.
Ms Arterton stated that on weekends, Mr Windeatt would spend time with the children on an ad hoc basis, for at least one day during the weekend, but not for the entire day. On occasion he would have the children overnight, to visit family, but this did not occur regularly.
Ms Arterton stated that when they first separated, they were sharing costs including the paying of day care, utilities and ongoing expenses as they had not sorted their finances until March 2023. She though that Mr Windeatt had about 9–10 hours of care of the children per week but could not quantify what the financial aspect of the sharing of costs equated to in terms of the care of the children.
Ms Arterton confirmed that Mr Windeatt commenced overnight care of the children in June 2023. The Child Support documents show that the care of the children from 7 June 2023 was 65% care of [Child 1] to Ms Arterton and 35% care of [Child 1] to Mr Windeatt and 72% care of [Child 2] to Ms Arterton and 28% care of [Child 2] to Mr Windeatt.[4]
[4] Page 103 of Child Support Documents – 2024/MC028217.
Ms Arterton confirmed that the care changed on 5 February 2024 and that she notified Child Support of the change in care on 23 February 2024. This is confirmed in the Child Support documents.[5] She stated that Mr Windeatt’s care of [Child 2] increased from 4 nights per fortnight to 5 nights per fortnight. [Child 1’s] care remained at 5 nights per fortnight. Ms Arterton confirmed, which Mr Windeatt did not dispute, that there are no court orders or parenting plans in place for the care of the children.
[5] Page 117 of Child Support documents – 2024/MC028130.
Mr Windeatt’s evidence, however, confirmed that they separated in September 2022 but that he remained at the [Suburb 1] property, sleeping on the couch, until sometime in late October 2022. At this time, he started sleeping at other places but did not find his own property until the end of April 2023. He stated that in late October 2022, he started staying with friends and family overnight. The children did not stay in his overnight care until after he had found his own property. Mr Windeatt’s evidence confirmed the arrangements regarding the care of the children that commenced in September 2022. He stated that he would assist with preparing the children for child care and school and would take the children to child care and school on the days that Ms Arterton was working. On the days that Ms Arterton was not working he would take [Child 1] to school. He would then collect the children from school and child care as required after work and would stay until they went to sleep. Mr Windeatt stated that this routine changed around the start of 2023 and he was sometimes not there in the morning to drop-off the children, and he only stayed of an evening occasionally after Ms Arterton arrived home. He stated that he would spend time with the children if Ms Arterton went out and that the weekend care was ad hoc for part of the weekend days and sometimes both days but that this varied considerably. Mr Windeatt stated that he was also on paternity leave in January 2023 and spent more time with [Child 1] during this period, on days that Ms Arterton was working. However, Ms Arterton stated that she had leave during the period from 23 December 2022 until 11 January 2023 because the child care centre was closed and she was therefore also caring for the children during this time.
Section 50 of the Act requires a determination of a percentage of care to be made where the Registrar is satisfied either that the person has had, or is likely to have, a pattern of care during a care period as considered to be appropriate having regard to all the circumstances.
The care period is such a period as the Registrar considers to be appropriate having regard to all the circumstances (subparagraph 50(1)(b)(ii) of the Act). The government policy in this regard, as set out in 2.2.1 of the Guide and followed by Child Support, provides that a care period is generally assumed to apply for the subsequent 12-month period from when the actual care of a child began or changed, however a shorter or longer care period may be appropriate depending upon the specific circumstances.
The Tribunal’s task on review is to stand in the shoes of the original decision-maker, although the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 makes it clear that the Tribunal makes its decision on review independently of the parties, including the primary decision-maker. It is not appropriate in undertaking that task, to consider further changes in the pattern of care between initial notification to Child Support up to the time of the Tribunal’s hearing – and evidence as to care beyond the appropriate care period is not likely to be relevant – save to the extent that such evidence may inform the actual or likely pattern of care as at the date of notification to Child Support for the appropriate care period.
In my view, the legislative scheme deals with any such subsequent change of care by requiring further notification to Child Support so that a new primary care percentage decision can be considered and made if appropriate. The term ‘pattern of care’ is not defined in the legislation. Therefore I must have regard to the actual or likely pattern of care at the point in time of the initial notification to Child Support, but informed by evidence now available.
Care is usually determined on the basis of the overnight arrangements in place. However, other factors can also be taken into account. These include such things as:
·To what extent the person has control of the child, including having overall responsibility for the child and making:
omajor decisions relating to who the child spends time with and the child’s health, education, discipline, recreational and/or social activities, and
oarrangements for others to meet the needs of the child (delegated care).
·To what extent the person meets the needs of the child by providing the child with accommodation, clothing, food, child care, education, health care, emotional support, supervision, transport and extracurricular activities.
In this matter, it is clear that Ms Arterton and Mr Windeatt were separated from 15 September 2022 with both continuing to provide care of the children. Mr Windeatt stated that he was still at the [Suburb 1] property for some time in September 2022, before he started staying overnight with family and friends. Ms Arterton’s evidence was that Mr Windeatt stopped residing at the [Suburb 1] property in September 2022 but would return to assist in the morning to ready the children for child care and school. I note that the children were not of an age where they are able to provide for their own needs, and are therefore more reliant on both parents for their care needs. Accordingly, I have determined that these other factors, including care other than overnight care, should also be considered in determining the care.
I find that Ms Arterton was providing the majority of care for the children, including during the day for [Child 2] when Ms Arterton was not at work. Nonetheless, Mr Windeatt was contributing to the care before and after work, and on weekends. In addition, Mr Windeatt was also contributing to the costs associated with the care of the children, to which Ms Arterton was also contributing. The care that Mr Windeatt contributed, however, became more sporadic from early 2023, both during the week and on weekends. In taking account of all of these factors, I have determined Ms Arterton’s care amounted to at least approximately 80% of the care of the children, and Mr Windeatt’s care of the children amounted to approximately 20% of the care.
I also note that Mr Windeatt stated he found his own accommodation after Ms Arterton contacted Child Support to register a registrable maintenance liability and notify of the care arrangements. This decision was made on 16 March 2023. Subsequent to the registration and the determination of care for the children with effect from 1 March 2023, Mr Windeatt contacted child support about further changes in the care of the children which were implemented from 7 June 2023. Mr Windeatt stated that he was unaware of the consequence of Child Support’s determination of the care when the decision was made on 16 March 2023 and was also unaware of the consequences of this decision. He stated that if the decision had not had an effect on child care subsidy, he probably would not have sought review of the decision.
I note that the care has changed since the original decision the subject of this application, as Mr Windeatt obtained his own accommodation and the children commenced overnight care. The Child Support documents show that a change in care of the children was notified from 7 June 2023 with corresponding percentages of care of 65% care of [Child 1] to Ms Arterton and 35% care of [Child 1] to Mr Windeatt and 72% care of [Child 2] to Ms Arterton and 28% care of [Child 2] to Mr Windeatt determined. Later still, on 5 February 2024, Ms Arterton notified that the care changed to 5 nights per fortnight for both children (65% care of both children to Ms Arterton and 35% care of both children to Mr Windeatt). Ms Arterton’s position is that the percentages recorded for child support from 5 February 2024 are incorrect – it should be 65% for her and 35% for Mr Windeatt for both children. Mr Windeatt did not dispute that these were the care arrangements for both children from 5 February 2024.
Pursuant to section 30 of the Act, when a parent has applied for an administrative assessment of child support pursuant to section 25 of the Act and the application has been properly made, Child Support must accept the application. Section 31 of the Act then requires that Child Support assess the annual rate of child support payable by a parent for the days in the child support period that starts, relevantly to this matter, on the day on which the application is made. One of the variables, or particulars, required to assess the annual rate of child support is the care percentages to apply for each parent (or other responsible person as defined by the Act). Those percentages of care then generally apply for each day in the child support period on and from the application day, unless revoked (section 54B of the Act).
As regards to determining a parent’s percentage of care, section 49 of the Act provides for when a parent has no pattern of care of a child and section 50 of the Act provides for when there is a pattern of care. Based upon the evidence, I am satisfied that there was a pattern of care of the children for both Ms Arterton and Mr Windeatt. Care percentages for each are then to be determined having regard to the actual care a person has had, or is likely to have, during a care period. Section 54A of the Act provides that the actual care of a child that a person has had, or is likely to have, during a care period may be worked out based on the number of nights that a child was, or is likely to be, in the care of a person.

A care period is defined in the Act as being such period as considered to be appropriate having regard to all the circumstances. The Child Support Guide states that a care period is generally the 12-month period with the same care arrangements then assumed to continue to apply after the end of the care period unless Child Support is notified or becomes aware that the actual care taking place does not correspond with the existing percentage of care determination and the requirements of the legislation are satisfied for new percentage of care determinations to be made.
I note that subsequent to registration of the child support case from 1 March 2023, notifications of changes in care have been made, with subsequent decisions made in relation to those subsequent notifications. One of those subsequent notifications is the subject of an application before the Tribunal and I have considered that subsequent application from 5 February 2024 and I have made a determination of the care from this date below. The change from 7 June 2023 is not before the Tribunal and is not subject to this review.
I consider the appropriate care period in relation to the initial application to be the period from 15 September 2022, the commencement of the parent’s separation, to 7 June 2023 when the care first changed. I am satisfied based on the oral evidence of the parties that the pattern of care of the children in that period was 80% care per week to Ms Arterton and 20% care per week to Mr Windeatt, based on the hours of care of Mr Windeatt during this period and the hours of care and overnight care attributable to Ms Arterton. I therefore find that the percentage of care determinations to apply for each parent are 80% for Ms Arterton and 20% for Mr Windeatt.

From what date should the care determination on registration of the child support assessment apply?

As regards the date of application of those percentage of care determinations, as has already been observed, pursuant to sections 31 and 54B of the Act, the percentages of care apply to each day in a child support period on and from the application day, that is 1 March 2023 in this case.
Mr Windeatt’s objection, and Ms Arterton’s subsequent application to the Tribunal, was based upon his concern that the care percentages had been incorrectly calculated. I have found that those calculations were incorrect. Mr Windeatt’s further concern was in relation to Child Support’s decision being expressed as determining those percentages of care ‘from 15 September 2022’ with that information then being transferred and utilised by the Family Assistance Office in ascertaining Mr Windeatt’s child care subsidy and family tax benefit entitlement. I have addressed this issue in the related decision before the Tribunal. I acknowledge the relationship between the percentage of care determinations for Child Support purposes and the alignment of care percentages in the child support and family assistance systems, with a possible consequential impact for Mr Windeatt. Ms Arterton did not realise this would occur when the application for registration with Child Support was made.
The child support legislation requires care percentage determinations to be made to inform the appropriate rate of child support payable. The percentages of care apply to that end from the application day. Child Support’s 16 March 2023 decision was notified to the parents on that basis with letters of that date advising Ms Arterton and Mr Windeatt that the child support application had been accepted and enclosing the child support assessments from 1 March 2023.
No mention was made in those letters of the care percentages applying ‘from 15 September 2022’; rather at what is best described at the ‘back end’, Child Support have nominated that those percentages of care applied from 15 September 2022, presumably informed from Ms Arterton’s indication of that date in her application, being the date the parents commenced living separately. Although not stated in its 16 March 2023 decision and notification, Child Support has purported to deal with a period prior to any child support assessment being in existence, utilising ‘from 15 September 2022’ at the ‘back end’ resulting in an automatic transfer of that information to the Family Assistance Office. The clear task of Child Support upon receipt of Mr Windeatt’s application was to determine the percentages of care applying for each of Ms Arterton and Mr Windeatt from the application day, 1 March 2023, and not any earlier date. Child Support acted beyond the legislation in stating that care percentages applied for a date prior to that time.
I will therefore vary the decision under review so that a percentage of care of 80% applies for Ms Arterton and a percentage of care of 20% applies for Mr Windeatt from 1 March 2023, not 15 September 2022. However, I must also consider the effect of varying the determination to which the care percentages decision relates and the effect of section 87AA of the Registration and Collection Act.
If an objection concerning care percentages is lodged more than 28 days after notice of the care percentage decision is given, section 87AA of the Registration and Collection Act provides that the date of effect in relation to variation to or a new determination is the date of the objection unless there are special circumstances which prevented the person from lodging their objection within 28 days. As already canvassed, Mr Windeatt objected to Child Support’s 16 March 2023 decision more than 28 days after being notified of the decision, on 12 April 2024. Mr Windeatt’s evidence was that he did not object until outside this time period because he did not appreciate the implication of the decision on his child care subsidy entitlement. The implication of the decision from Mr Windeatt’s point of view was because of Child Support implementing ‘from 15 September 2022’ in its records with automatic transfer of that information to Centrelink.
However, as already noted there was no reference to the 15 September 2022 date in Child Support’s letter of 16 March 2023 such that Mr Windeatt, or Ms Arterton, would have been on notice of that date being utilised for other purposes. In those circumstances, I am satisfied that there were special circumstances that prevented Mr Windeatt from objecting within 28 days such that subsection 87AA(1) of the Registration and Collection Act applies as if the reference to 28 days in that subsection were a reference to a longer period extending to 12 April 2024.

Has there been any further changes in the care of [Child 1] and [Child 2]?

It is uncontroversial that the care arrangements, as determined by Child Support, changed from 7 June 2023. Child Support had changed the care to 65% care of [Child 1] to Ms Arterton and 35% care of [Child 1] to Mr Windeatt. In respect of [Child 2], Child Support had changed the care to 72% care to Ms Arterton and 28% care to Mr Windeatt. Both Mr Windeatt and Ms Arterton confirmed that there are no court orders or parenting plans regarding [Child 1] and [Child 2’s] care.
Ms Arterton and Mr Windeatt both confirmed that this care changed from 5 February 2024 when Mr Windeatt’s care of [Child 2] increased to align with his care of [Child 1], that is, he started having 5 nights per fortnight of care of [Child 2], every Wednesday and Thursday night and every second Saturday night, as was occurring for [Child 1]. Ms Arterton stated that while she was not comfortable with this arrangement, Mr Windeatt was adamant that this would be the care arrangement and so she had agreed to the care arrangements for both children.
Section 50 of the Act requires a new determination of a percentage of care to be made where an existing determination has been revoked and Child Support is satisfied either that the person has had, or is likely to have, a pattern of care during a care period.

Should the care determinations in relation to [Child 1] and [Child 2] from 7 June 2023 be revoked?

47.Subsection 54F(1) of the Act sets out certain circumstances in which a determination of a percentage of care must be revoked. Specifically, it states that an existing determination must be revoked if the Registrar is notified that the care taking place does not correspond with the responsible person’s existing care of the child or children.
48.In this case, care determinations were made under section 50 of the Act from 7 June 2023, that Ms Arterton had care of [Child 1] corresponding with 65% and Mr Windeatt had care of [Child 1], corresponding with 35% while Ms Arterton had care of [Child 2] corresponding with 72% and Mr Windeatt had care of [Child 2] corresponding with 28%. However, it is not in dispute that from 5 February 2024 the care of [Child 2] changed with Mr Windeatt’s care increasing to care corresponding to 35%. Therefore, paragraph 54F(1)(a) of the Act is satisfied in relation to [Child 2] (only). Section 50 of the Act provides that if a determination is revoked and if the Registrar is satisfied that a party has had, or is likely to have, a pattern of care during a care period, a determination of the percentage of care during the care period must be made. ‘Actual care’ may be worked out based on the number of nights the child was or will be in the care of the person (subsection 54A(1)).
49.I am required to consider what the actual care of [Child 2] was or is likely to be during the care period. The care period is such a period as the Child Support Registrar considers to be appropriate having regard to all the circumstances (section 50 of the Act). As discussed above, this is set out in Chapter 2.2.1 of the Guide, and is generally a 12-month period from the day on which the actual care for a child changed.

I have determined, based on the evidence of both Mr Windeatt and Ms Arterton, that the care for Mr Windeatt and Ms Arterton in respect of [Child 2] changed from 5 February 2024. Mr Windeatt notified on 23 February 2024 that the care for [Child 1] and [Child 2] had changed from 2 January 2024. At the time of the notification, [Child 2] was in Mr Windeatt’s care 28% of the time and Ms Arterton’s care 72% of the time. Ms Arterton spoke to Child Support about this change and advised that the care changed on 5 February 2024.
It is clear from both Ms Arterton’s and Mr Windeatt’s evidence that the decision about the care of the children had been made by Mr Windeatt, and Ms Arterton had accepted these care arrangements. Both parents did not object that the care change occurred from the date Mr Windeatt notified Child Support, that is 5 February 2024. I am satisfied that both Ms Arterton’s and Mr Windeatt’s evidence indicates that the care had changed for [Child 2], from 5 February 2024. I am satisfied that there was no change in the care of [Child 1]. I therefore determine that the care change occurred from 5 February 2024, with Mr Windeatt having 35% of care of [Child 2] from this date and Ms Arterton’s care being 65% of care of [Child 2] for the purposes of child support.
As I have determined that the care of [Child 2] changed from 5 February 2024, the previous care determinations for [Child 2] of 72% to Ms Arterton and 28% to Mr Windeatt are revoked from 4 February 2024 and new percentage of care determinations corresponding to Mr Windeatt’s and Ms Arterton’s care of [Child 2] are apply from 5 February 2024.

DECISION

The decisions under review are set aside and decisions substituted as follows:

· That the percentage of care of 80% for the care of [Child 1] and [Child 2] applies to Ms Arterton and a percentage of care of 20% for the care of [Child 1] and [Child 2] applies to Mr Windeatt from 1 March 2023 and not 15 September 2022.
· That subsection 87AA(1) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 applies as if the reference to 28 days in that subsection were a reference to a longer period extending to 12 April 2024 in relation to the care percentage decision from 1 March 2023.
· The existing percentage of care determinations for [Child 2] of 72% for Ms Arterton and 28% for Mr Windeatt are revoked from 4 February 2024 with percentage of care determinations for [Child 2] of 65% for Ms Arterton and 35% for Mr Windeatt applying from 5 February 2024. The existing percentage of care determinations for [Child 1] of 65% for Ms Arterton and 35% for Mr Windeatt are not revoked.

Date(s) of hearing:	Tuesday, 24 September 2024
Representative for the Applicant:	Self-represented
Representative for the Other party:	Self-represented