Administrative
Appeals
Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2005] AATA 445
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No W2004/357
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION ) Re THOMAS CAMERON Applicant
And
CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal Associate Professor S D Hotop, Deputy President Date18 May 2005
PlacePerth
Decision The application for review is dismissed. ...........(sgd S D Hotop)............
Deputy President
and
“a statement that specifically draws the attention of the liable parent and the carer entitled to child support to the right … to apply to the Registrar for a determination under Part 6A having the effect that the provisions of this Act relating to administrative assessment of child support will be departed from in relation to a child in the special circumstances of the case;”.
6. Part 6A of the Act provides for the making by the Registrar of a determination having the effect that the provisions of the Act relating to administrative assessment of child support will be departed from in relation to a child. Section 98C authorises the Registrar, upon application by either the relevant “liable parent” or the relevant “carer entitled to child support”, to make such a determination. Section 98G requires the Registrar to serve a copy of the application and any accompanying documentation on the other party, and to inform that other party in writing that they may make a representation regarding the application, and, in the event that such a representation is made, to serve a copy of it, and of any accompanying documentation, on the applicant. Section 98JA provides that, if the Registrar refuses to make a determination, the Registrar must serve notice in writing of the decision on the applicant, and such notice must include a statement to the effect that, inter alia, the applicant may, subject to the Act, object to the decision.
7. Section 98K authorises the Registrar of their own motion to make a determination under Part 6A. Section 98M requires the Registrar to give prior notice in writing to both parties and to inform them in writing that they may make a representation to the Registrar. If a party make a representation, the Registrar is required to serve a copy of it, and of any accompanying documentation, on the other party.
8. Section 98S(1) lists the kinds of determinations that the Registrar is authorised to make under Part 6A, including:
“(a)a determination varying the rate of child support payable by the liable parent concerned;
(b)a determination varying the child support percentage, adjusted income amount, child support income amount or exempted income amount of the liable parent;
… ”.
9. Part 6B of the Act is as follows:
“Part 6B—Objection procedure and AAT review of certain decisions
98W Object and general principle of this Part
(1) The object of this Part is:
(a)to provide for internal reconsideration of decisions of the Registrar that are reviewable by a court having jurisdiction under this Act; and
(b)to provide for internal reconsideration of certain other decisions…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Cameron and Child Support Registrar and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2005] AATA 445
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered the statutory framework, particularly section 98ZE of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, which sets out the circumstances in which an objection to an assessment can be made. The court also examined relevant case law, including Allan v Transurban City Link Ltd and Brisbane Airport Corporation Ltd v Wright, to understand the principles governing the scope of tribunal review. The court found that the decision to grant an extension of time did not constitute a reviewable decision under the Act. It was determined that the Tribunal lacked the jurisdiction to review the decision of the Registrar, as it pertained to procedural matters rather than substantive child support assessment.
As a result, the court dismissed Cameron's application for review. The Tribunal's decision to grant the extension of time was upheld as outside the scope of its review powers. The court's reasoning was based on the statutory interpretation and the established legal principles that limited the scope of tribunal review to specific types of decisions.
ORDERS:
The application for review is dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
The application for review is dismissed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.