Dunphy and Bamford (Child support)

The case of *Dunphy and Bamford* concerned a dispute over the percentage of care for a child, brought before the court by the applicant, Dunphy, and the respondent, Bamford. The central issue was a change in the likely pattern of care for the child, which had led to a situation where neither parent had primary care. This change prompted the revocation of an existing determination of the child's percentage of care.

The court was required to determine whether the existing percentage of care determination should be revoked and a new determination made, given the altered care arrangements. Specifically, the court had to consider the impact of neither parent having the child in their care on the assessment of the percentage of care.

Justice Longo M applied the principles of the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988* (Cth) to the facts. The court found that the change in the pattern of care, to the extent that neither parent had the child in their care, necessitated a review and potential substitution of the existing determination. The court reasoned that the legislative framework for child support assessments is predicated on a discernible pattern of care, and when this pattern fundamentally shifts to a state where neither parent holds the primary care role, the existing assessment is no longer reflective of the reality.

The court set aside the existing determination of the percentage of care and made a new determination reflecting the current care arrangements.