BWCH and Principal Member, Social Security Appeals Tribunal

This matter concerned an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) concerning a decision by the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) to refuse an extension of time for BWCH to appeal decisions of the Registrar concerning child support payments. BWCH had made numerous objections to assessments over a four-year period, some successful and some rejected. The SSAT had previously made determinations regarding the taxable incomes of both parents, and BWCH had lodged an objection to one such determination with the Child Support Agency, which advised her to seek review by the SSAT.

The primary legal issues before the AAT were whether the SSAT had erred in refusing BWCH's application for an extension of time to appeal the Registrar's decisions of 8 September 2010 and 10 June 2011, and whether BWCH's application fee should be waived on the basis of a successful earlier application to the SSAT. The SSAT's refusal of the extension of time was based on BWCH's application being lodged nearly three years outside the statutory 28-day limit.

The AAT affirmed the SSAT's decision, applying the principles established in *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Cohen*. The SSAT had considered a range of factors, including the reasons for the delay, prejudice to the other party, wider public prejudice, fairness, and the merits of the substantive application. The SSAT found that while BWCH had indicated disagreement with the Registrar's decisions, she had not taken timely action to contest them, effectively resting on her rights. Furthermore, the SSAT found BWCH's substantive application to be devoid of merit, as she had not provided evidence to substantiate claims of the father hiding income, and the Registrar had already considered the issue of non-disclosure in a previous decision.