BELL & NAHOS

In the matter of *Bell & Nahos*, heard by Judge Small, the Applicant sought a departure order under the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth). The Respondent sought a lump sum payment of child support.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether it was just and equitable to make the departure order sought by the Applicant. Additionally, the Court was required to determine if a lump sum payment of child support was just and equitable under the Act.

The Court dismissed the Applicant's application for a departure order, finding it was not satisfied that such an order would be just and equitable or otherwise proper under section 117(1)(b)(ii) of the Act. However, the Court was satisfied that a lump sum payment of child support was just and equitable under section 123A(1) of the Act. Consequently, the Respondent was ordered to pay the Applicant a sum of $13,853.88, less any amounts collected by the Department of Human Services (Child Support) since 11 June 2014. This payment was to be credited 100% against the Respondent's liability for administrative assessments of child support for the child X for the period 11 June 2014 to 10 June 2017, pursuant to section 125 of the Act.