Clough and Child Support Registrar (Child support)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Clough to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for an extension of time to seek review of a decision made by the Child Support Registrar on 13 April 2020. The Registrar's decision had disallowed Mr Clough's objection to an earlier decision by Services Australia – Child Support not to depart from an administrative assessment of child support. Mr Clough lodged his application for review approximately five months after being notified of the decision, well outside the prescribed 28-day time limit.

The AAT was required to determine whether to grant Mr Clough an extension of time to lodge his application for review. In doing so, the Tribunal had to consider the legal principles governing the exercise of discretion to extend time limits for lodging appeals, as established in cases such as *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Cohen* and *Brown v Commissioner of Taxation*. These principles require a balancing of various factors, including the reasons for the delay, any prejudice to the other party, the merits of the substantive application, and whether it is proper and equitable to grant the extension.

The Tribunal found that Mr Clough's explanation for the delay, which cited engagement in mediation and difficulties arising from the COVID-19 pandemic, was not satisfactory. It was noted that mediation did not preclude the lodging of an application for review within the time limit, and that Mr Clough had effectively rested on his rights. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered the merits of the substantive application and concluded that while there was arguable merit, it was not compelling. The objections officer had already addressed the grounds for departure from the administrative assessment, and the Tribunal found no fundamental flaw in those conclusions. The Tribunal also considered potential prejudice to the other party, [Mrs A], who might have been assessed to have overpaid child support.

Ultimately, the AAT refused Mr Clough's application for an extension of time. The Tribunal concluded that the explanation for the delay was not reasonable, the merits of the case were not compelling, and it would not be fair or proper in the circumstances to depart from the usual timeframe for lodging an application.