Booker and Isley (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal by the father, Booker, against a decision of the Registrar of the Child Support Agency regarding the percentage of care for the parties' child. The mother, Isley, was the respondent. The dispute arose following the issuance of a non-contact intervention order against the father, which the Registrar had considered in determining the percentage of care. The father contended that the existing determination of care should not have been revoked and that the new assessment should not have taken effect from the date it did.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Registrar erred in revoking the existing percentage of care determination and in setting the date of effect for the new assessment, particularly in light of the non-contact intervention order. The Tribunal was required to consider the impact of such an order on the assessment of care percentages under the relevant legislation and the principles governing the date from which such assessments should operate.

The Tribunal found that the Registrar had incorrectly applied the legislation by treating the intervention order as automatically revoking the existing care determination. It held that the intervention order did not, in itself, signify a change in the factual care arrangements for the child. The Tribunal reasoned that a new assessment of care percentage should only be made where there is a factual change in the care arrangements, and that the intervention order alone did not establish such a change. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Registrar's decision and substituted its own, finding that the existing percentage of care determination remained valid and that the new assessment should not have been made at that time.