Farnworth and Child Support Registrar (Child support)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Farnworth for an extension of time to seek a review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) of a decision made by the Child Support Registrar on 2 September 2019. The Registrar's decision had disallowed Mr Farnworth's objection to a "change of assessment" decision. The application for an extension was heard by the Social Services & Child Support Division of the AAT.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether to grant Mr Farnworth an extension of time to lodge his application for AAT first review, which was required to be filed within 28 days of receiving the Registrar's decision. The Tribunal was required to consider the established legal principles governing such applications, including the need for a satisfactory explanation for the delay, the merits of the substantive application, potential prejudice to the other party, and relevant public interest considerations.

The Tribunal applied the principles derived from cases such as *Lucic v Nolan*, *Martinsen v Secretary, Department of Family & Community Services*, and *Gallo v Dawson*, which require a balancing of factors to ensure justice is done. It found that Mr Farnworth had not provided a reasonable explanation for his delay, noting that he was clearly advised of his review rights and the relevant contact number for the AAT. While acknowledging that Mr Farnworth's substantive application might have some arguable merit, the Tribunal also considered that a fresh "change of assessment" application could be made based on his reported change in circumstances. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted potential prejudice to the other party who was entitled to rely on the original decision, and the public interest in timely finality of decisions.

Ultimately, the Tribunal determined that the interests of justice were best served by refusing the extension of time. The orders made were that the application for an extension of time be refused.