Asbridge and Hueffer (Child support)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an objection by Mr. Asbridge to an estimated child support assessment made by the Child Support Registrar. Mr. Asbridge had elected an income of $0 for the assessment period, which the Registrar considered to be too low and therefore estimated his income at $70,000. The dispute centred on whether this estimated income was appropriate.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Child Support Registrar had erred in estimating Mr. Asbridge's income at $70,000, or if the elected income of $0 was a more accurate reflection of his financial circumstances for the purposes of child support assessment. The core legal issue was the application of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 concerning the estimation of a liable parent's income when an election is made that is considered unreasonable.

Member C Breheny affirmed the Registrar's decision, finding that Mr. Asbridge's election of $0 income was demonstrably too low and not a genuine reflection of his earning capacity. The Tribunal considered the evidence presented, including information about Mr. Asbridge's employment history and financial resources, which indicated a capacity to earn significantly more than $0. The principle applied was that where a parent’s elected income is unreasonable, the Registrar is empowered to estimate their income based on available information to ensure a fair child support assessment. The Tribunal concluded that the estimated income of $70,000 was a reasonable figure given the circumstances.