Edwards v Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Edwards v Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation [2017] FCAFC 173

Appeal from:

Edwards v Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation [2017] FCA 375

File numbers:

VID 439 of 2017
VID 440 of 2017

Judges:

GRIFFITHS, PAGONE AND DAVIES JJ

Date of judgment:

8 November 2017

Catchwords:

SUPERANNUATION – payment of pension of deceased member – payment to person other than spouse – payment to dependent children

Legislation:

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth)

Superannuation Act 1976 (Cth)

Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993 (Cth)

Cases cited:

Attorney-General (Cth) v Breckler (1999) 197 CLR 83

Board of Trustees of the State Public Sector Superannuation Scheme v Edington (2011) 119 ALD 472

Date of hearing:

31 October 2017

Registry:

Victoria

Division:

General Division

National Practice Area:

Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights

Category:

Catchwords

Number of paragraphs:

9

Counsel for the Appellant:

Mr D Gibson

Counsel for the Respondents:

Ms E Bennett

Solicitor for the Respondents:

Allens

ORDERS

VID 439 of 2017

BETWEEN:

WALTER PERCIVAL EDWARDS

Appellant

AND:

COMMONWEALTH SUPERANNUATION CORPORATION

Respondent

JUDGES:	GRIFFITHS, PAGONE AND DAVIES JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	8 NOVEMBER 2017

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appeal be dismissed with costs.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

ORDERS

VID 440 of 2017

BETWEEN:

WALTER PERCIVAL EDWARDS

Appellant

AND:

SUPERANNUATION COMPLAINTS TRIBUNAL

First Respondent

COMMONWEALTH SUPERANNUATION CORPORATION

Second Respondent

JUDGES:	GRIFFITHS, PAGONE AND DAVIES JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	8 NOVEMBER 2017

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appeal be dismissed with costs.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

1. The outcome of these appeals depends upon the claim made by the appellant (“Mr Edwards”) that payments made to his children pursuant to s 114 of the Superannuation Act 1976 (Cth) (“the Superannuation Act”) ought instead to have been paid to him. His children had been found to be eligible to receive part of a payment payable to their mother (“Ms Harris”) as the de facto spouse of the late Mr Paulusz, a deceased member of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme Fund (“the Fund”) managed by the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation (“the Trustee”). On 20 May 2013 it had been determined by the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal that Ms Harris was eligible for a spousal benefit under the Fund and that a portion of the pension would include the payment of arrears in respect of her children from 17 May 2009 (the date of Mr Paulusz’s death) until the then next pension payday (then being 8 August 2013). On 29 July 2013 the Trustee decided that the portion of Ms Harris’ pension referrable to her children be paid directly to them pursuant to s 114 of the Superannuation Act.

2. The payments in question related to a period during which the two children were in the care and control of and were dependant on Mr Edwards (their father) rather than their mother (Ms Harris) or the deceased…