Broom and Marnham (Child support) - [2025] ARTA 244

Broom and Marnham (Child support) [2025] ARTA 244 (17 January 2025)
Applicant/s:  Mr Broom
Respondent:  Child Support Registrar
Other Parties:       Miss Marnham
Tribunal Number:   2024/SC028619
Tribunal: Senior Member A Suthers
Place:Sydney
Date:17 January 2025

Decision:The decision under review is set aside and, in substitution:
The objection lodged by Mr Broom on 25 March 2024 is allowed and the parties’ respective percentages of care will be recorded as 42% to Mr Broom and 58% to Miss Marnham, applying in the assessment on and from 27 September 2024.

CATCHWORDS
CHILD SUPPORT – percentage of care – the objection lodged by Mr Broom is allowed – a new pattern of care commenced – parties’ respective percentages of care will be changed – decision under review set aside and substituted

Names used in all published decisions are pseudonyms. Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision and replaced with generic information pursuant to subsection 16(2AB) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

Statement of Reasons
SUMMARY
1.The Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (the Act) provides for Services Australia – Child Support (Child Support), to make an administrative assessment of child support. Child Support does so by reference to the relevant legislation and to the ‘Child Support Guide’ (the Guide) published by the Australian Government where relevant. The Guide contains governmental guidelines and statements of policy as to how the relevant legislation is to be applied.
2.Under sections 25 and 25A of the Act, subject to certain conditions that are not controversial here, a parent or non-parent carer of a relevant child may apply for an administrative assessment. If the relevant conditions are met, Child Support must make the assessment using a formula containing variables such as the parents’ (or non-parent carer’s) adjusted taxable incomes and the respective percentages of care the parties to the assessment have provided, or are likely to provide for each relevant child, in the ‘care period’ that Child Support considers is appropriate to consider.
3.Child Support usually considers a care period of 12 months from when the actual pattern of care of a child began or changed: subparagraph 50(1)(b)(ii) of the Act and section 2.2.1 of the Guide. If the assessment is made before the end of the care period, Child Support must make a partially forward-looking judgment as to the care of each relevant child a party to the assessment is likely to provide over the period.
4.In doing so, Child Support considers whether a party to the assessment has had, or is likely to have, a ‘pattern of care’ for the child during the care period. The pattern of care informs the assessment of the ‘percentage of care’ used in the formula. The pattern and percentage of care will commonly be determined by reference to the number of nights each child spends in the care of each party to the assessment: section 54A of the Act and section 2.2.1 of the Guide.
5.Once an assessment of the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Broom and Marnham (Child support)

Details

AGLC: Broom and Marnham (Child support) [2025] ARTA 244
Case: [2025] ARTA 244
Decision Date: 17 January 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Mr Broom lodged an objection against a decision by the Child Support Registrar concerning the percentage of care attributed to him in relation to his child with Miss Marnham. The matter was heard by the Administrative Review Tribunal, where Mr Broom argued that the percentage of care assigned to him should be adjusted. The primary legal issue was determining the appropriate percentage of care that Mr Broom provided for his child, considering the late objections and applications for review. The court had to decide whether Mr Broom or his mother provided the care when the child was in his care.

The Tribunal assessed the evidence and found that Mr Broom provided care for his child for six nights each fortnight. The court relied on the evidence that Mr Broom took responsibility for the child's routine care tasks, despite his mother assisting with day-to-day care such as dropping the child off at daycare. The Tribunal concluded that Mr Broom's mother did not provide care independently but acted as a delegate for Mr Broom. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the original decision and determined that Mr Broom provided 42% care, and Miss Marnham provided 58% care. The decision took effect from the date of the application for review, 27 September 2024.

The Tribunal allowed Mr Broom's objection and set aside the original decision of the Child Support Registrar. The Tribunal found that Mr Broom provided 42% care, and Miss Marnham provided 58% care, effective from 27 September 2024.

Orders