Carraher and Edelstein (Child support)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the child support arrangements between Carraher and Edelstein concerning the percentage of care for their child. The dispute centred on whether there had been a change to the likely pattern of care, which would necessitate a review and potential alteration of existing percentage of care determinations. The AAT was tasked with determining if the existing determinations should be revoked and new ones made, or if the decisions under review should be set aside and substituted.

The primary legal issues before the AAT were twofold. Firstly, the Tribunal had to determine whether the likely pattern of care for the child had changed to such an extent that the existing percentage of care determinations were no longer accurate or appropriate. Secondly, the AAT was required to consider the date of effect of any decision it made, particularly in light of a late application for review. This necessitated an examination of whether special circumstances existed that prevented the application for review from being lodged within the prescribed timeframes, and if so, whether the Tribunal should exercise its discretion to make a determination under subsection 95N(2) of the relevant legislation.

In its reasoning, the AAT found that special circumstances did indeed exist which prevented the timely lodgement of the application for review. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to exercise its discretion under subsection 95N(2) to proceed with the review. The AAT then went on to consider the substantive issue of the percentage of care, ultimately determining that the existing percentage of care determinations should be revoked and new determinations made to reflect the changed circumstances. The decisions under review were accordingly set aside and substituted.