Bakshi and Child Support Registrar (Child support)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Bakshi for an extension of time to seek a review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) of a decision made by the Child Support Registrar on 5 August 2019. The Registrar's decision disallowed Mr Bakshi's request for an extension of time to object to an original "change of assessment" decision made on 3 July 2014, which determined his adjusted taxable income for child support purposes.

The AAT was required to determine whether to grant Mr Bakshi an extension of time to apply for a first review of the Registrar's decision, despite the statutory time limit having expired. This involved considering the established legal principles for granting extensions of time in such circumstances, including the explanation for the delay, the merits of the substantial application, potential prejudice to the other party, and any relevant public interest considerations.

The Tribunal applied the principles derived from cases such as *Lucic v Nolan* and *Martinsen v Secretary, Department of Family & Community Services*, which require a balancing of factors to ensure justice is done. The Tribunal found that Mr Bakshi's explanation for the delay, citing a medical condition, was not particularly compelling, especially given the lack of further medical evidence and the fact that lodging an objection did not necessitate legal assistance. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered that the original decision had been made over five years prior, and Mr Bakshi had not presented any evidence of a life event significant enough to prevent him from lodging an objection within the prescribed timeframes. The Tribunal also noted the potential prejudice to the other party, who had relied on the original decision, and the public interest in timely reviews and certainty regarding child support assessments.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that Mr Bakshi's application had no prospects of success and that the interests of justice were best served by refusing the extension of time. Accordingly, the application for an extension of time was refused.