Boyce and Jervis (Child support)

[2018] AATA 4346

Boyce and Jervis (Child support) [2018] AATA 4346 (26 September 2018)

DIVISION:Social Services & Child Support Division

REVIEW NUMBER:  2018/AC014879

APPLICANT:  Mr Boyce

OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar

Mrs Jervis

TRIBUNAL:Member K Buxton

DECISION DATE:  26 September 2018

CATCHWORDS
CHILD SUPPORT – reconciliation of estimate of income – no reasonable prospect of success – application dismissed

Names used in all published decisions are pseudonyms. Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been removed from this decision and replaced with generic information so as not to identify involved individuals as required by subsections 16(2AB)-16(2AC) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

DISMISSAL OF APPLICATION FOR REVIEW:

1. I convened a directions hearing in this matter today. Mrs Jervis did not participate and, after discussing the issues arising in this matter by telephone with Mr Boyce, he indicated that he did not oppose the dismissal of this review application on the basis that the application did not have reasonable prospects of success. Mr Boyce accepted that the discretionary factors he has raised in relation to his financial circumstances, and particularly the inclusion of certain superannuation payments in his reconciled 2016/17 taxable income, could not be taken into account in the review of the objection decision relation the application of that reconciliation process.

2. The objection decision was made on 21 August 2018. During the directions hearing Mr Boyce indicated that he had also filed an application for a departure from the administrative assessment of child support, under Part 6A of the Child support Assessment Act (1989) Cth, and that an objection decision has been made in relation to that application on 13 August 2018.

3. Mr Boyce stated that, during his contact with the CSA, he had been encouraged to seek review of the decision under review rather than proceed with a review of the objection decision made on 13 August 2018 under Part 6A. As Mr Boyce has waited more than 28 days to seek review of that objection decision it is open to Mr Boyce to raise this and any other issues relevant to delay in any application he may make to extend time within which to apply to the tribunal for review of the 13 August 2018 decision.

1. Mr Boyce raised in his departure application various arguments in relation to his superannuation payments and why the inclusion of those in his taxable income makes the child support assessment unfair. As the decision under review deals with a reconciliation of Mr Boyce’s taxable income against his estimated income for the 2016/17 year, such discretionary factors could not be taken into account in a way which could lead to excluding that income from the child support assessment and those factors would not alter the decision under review to undertake an income reconciliation. The tribunal is satisfied, for the reasons discussed during the directions hearing, that the legislation has been correctly applied to the facts in this case and that the issues raised by Mr Boyce are more properly to be dealt with in his departure application. The tribunal could not reach a different decision to the decision under review in relation to the reconciliation of Mr Boyce 2016/17 taxable income. Therefore, the tribunal is finds that the application does not have reasonable prospects of success. Accordingly, the Tribunal dismisses the application for review pursuant to subsection 42B of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975.