Artliff and Varey (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal by the father, Artliff, against a departure determination made by the Registrar of the Child Support Agency. The dispute centred on the assessment of the father's income for child support purposes, specifically whether his income should be assessed at a higher amount than that declared, taking into account his income, property, and financial resources, including businesses operated through companies. The mother, Varey, had sought the departure determination. The review was heard by a Senior Member of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Registrar's decision to depart from the assessment of the father's child support liability was justified under the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988* (Cth). This involved determining whether the father's actual ability to pay child support was greater than his assessed income, particularly in light of his business interests and a claim that his income was reduced due to undertaking a training course.

The Tribunal set aside the Registrar's decision and substituted its own. The reasoning focused on the father's control over his income through his companies and the lack of evidence to support his claim of reduced income due to the training course. The Tribunal applied the principles of assessing a parent's capacity to pay child support, considering not just declared income but also their financial resources and the ability to access funds from entities they control. The Tribunal found that the father had the capacity to pay a higher amount of child support than was initially assessed.

The Tribunal ordered that the father's child support assessment be varied to reflect a higher income, thereby increasing his child support liability.