Franklin and Corey (Child support)

Franklin and Corey (Child Support) concerned a dispute regarding child support payments, brought before the court for review. The central issue was whether payments made by one parent to a third party, rather than directly to the other parent or through the Child Support Registrar, constituted valid child support payments. The court was tasked with determining the intention of both parents in relation to these payments and whether they qualified as "prescribed payments" under the relevant legislation.

The court was required to consider the legal definition of child support payments and the circumstances under which payments made to a third party could be recognised as satisfying a child support liability. This involved an examination of the parties' intentions at the time the payments were made and whether those payments were intended to be in lieu of, or as a contribution towards, the child support obligations. The court also had to assess whether the nature of the payments met the criteria for "prescribed payments" as defined by the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

In its reasoning, the court focused on the objective intention of both parents concerning the payments. It applied the principles that for a payment to a third party to be considered a child support payment, there must be a clear intention by both parents that the payment would discharge or contribute to the child support liability. The court affirmed the decision under review, finding that the payments made did not meet the necessary criteria to be recognised as prescribed payments for child support purposes, likely due to a lack of mutual intention or the nature of the payments themselves.