Butcher and Palmerstone (Child support)
Case
•
[2020] AATA 2681
•9 June 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Butcher and Palmerstone (Child support) [2020] AATA 2681
[2020] AATA 2681
9 June 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the dispute between Butcher and Palmerstone concerning the percentage of care arrangements for a child. The applicant, Butcher, sought to have existing percentage of care determinations revoked and new determinations made, arguing that there had been a change to the likely pattern of care.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the evidence established a change to the likely pattern of care for the child, and if so, whether the existing percentage of care determinations should be revoked and new ones made.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the evidence did not demonstrate a sufficient change to the likely pattern of care to warrant the revocation of existing determinations and the making of new ones. The Tribunal applied the principles governing the assessment of percentage of care under the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988*, focusing on the likely future pattern of care rather than past arrangements.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the evidence established a change to the likely pattern of care for the child, and if so, whether the existing percentage of care determinations should be revoked and new ones made.
The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the evidence did not demonstrate a sufficient change to the likely pattern of care to warrant the revocation of existing determinations and the making of new ones. The Tribunal applied the principles governing the assessment of percentage of care under the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988*, focusing on the likely future pattern of care rather than past arrangements.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Statutory Construction
-
Judicial Review
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0