FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA
| DAWSON v DAWSON & ANOR | [2018] FCCA 896 |
| Catchwords: CHILD SUPPORT – Review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where Applicant seeks impermissible merits review – no jurisdictional error – application dismissed. |
| Legislation: Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), ss.37, 44, 44AAA Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth), ss.98C, 98S, 117 |
| Cases cited: Morton & Morton & Anor (SSAT Appeal) [2014] FCCA 1737 Phelps & Child Support Registrar & Anor (SSAT Appeal) [2015] FCCA 159 |
| Applicant: | MR DAWSON |
| First Respondent: | MS DAWSON |
| Second Respondent: | CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR |
| File Number: | MLG 1500 of 2017 |
| Judgment of: | Judge Hartnett |
| Hearing date: | 27 March 2018 |
| Delivered at: | Albury |
| Delivered on: | 13 April 2018 |
REPRESENTATION
| The Applicant: | In Person |
| The First Respondent: | No Appearance |
| Counsel for the Second Respondent: | Ms Whittemore |
| Solicitors for the Second Respondent: | Sparke Helmore Lawyers |
ORDERS
The Notice of Appeal (Child Support) is dismissed.
The Applicant pay the Second Respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $7066.
IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Dawson v Dawson & Anor is approved pursuant to s.110X(4)(h) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth).
| FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE |
MLG 1500 of 2017
| MR DAWSON |
Applicant
And
| MS DAWSON |
First Respondent
| CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR |
Second Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
These proceedings commenced by a Notice of Appeal (Child Support) application filed by the Applicant on 21 July 2017. The Applicant subsequently filed an Amended Notice of Appeal (Child Support) on 24 August 2017 on which he proceeded.
The Applicant appeals from a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal - Social Services and Child Support (‘the Tribunal decision’) given on 14 June 2017.
The Applicant seeks the following orders:-
“1. An order that the appeal be allowed.
2. An order setting aside AAT’s decision made on 14 June 2017 and varied as follows:
a) Correct amount of child support to be recalculated for the period 6th July 2016 - 17 March 2017.
b) Correct of child support be calculated for the period after 17th March 2017.”
The decision of the Tribunal was posted to the Applicant on 26 June 2017 and the appeal was filed within time being 21 July 2017. This Court’s jurisdiction is only enlivened by a question of law properly raised on appeal.[1]
[1] Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) s 44AAA.
The Amended Notice of Appeal (Child Support) is annexed to these reasons (‘Annexure A’). It sets out “Question of law”, which includes allegations of bias and procedural unfairness together with claimed errors of law. Under the “Grounds of Appeal” heading the Applicant takes issue with factual findings made by the Tribunal; again alleges bias in the Tribunal decision; and makes complaint about the processes of the Tribunal including procedural unfairness.
As to the orders sought, orders 2(a) and (b) invite the Court to recalculate the amount of child support payable by the Applicant for the period covered by the…
Continue reading Dawson v Dawson & Anor
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Dawson v Dawson [2018] FCCA 896
- Case
- [2018] FCCA 896
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the original decision regarding child support was correct and ought to be upheld on appeal. This required the court to consider the relevant provisions of the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988* (Cth) and the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth) as they applied to the facts of the case.
Judge Hartnett dismissed the applicant's appeal. The reasoning for this decision is not detailed in the provided text, but the outcome indicates that the court found no error in the original child support assessment. Consequently, the applicant was ordered to pay the second respondent's costs, fixed at $7066.
Orders
Orders of the court
1.
The Notice of Appeal (Child Support) is dismissed.
2.
The Applicant pay the Second Respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $7066.
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.