G and G

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

G & G [2004] FMCAfam 9

CHILD SUPPORT – Application to vary and discharge child support agreement – father not forthcoming with primary financial material regarding his income – father alleged three distinct grounds to justify a variation – duress – contact with children had increased so as to justify a change to account for the time he spends with his children and that his financial position had changed – father’s veracity doubted due to financial discrepancies – application dismissed – no special circumstances established.

COSTS – Costs awarded in accordance with the Family Law Scale – where the Federal Magistrates Court Scale would not sufficiently provide for the expense incurred by the wife in the course of proceedings.

Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth), ss.3, 4, 4(3), 92, 95(2), 117, 117(2)
Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss.117, 117(1), 117(2)(a), 117(2)(b), 117(2)(c), 117(2)(d), 117(2)(e), 117(2)(f)

Wild v Ballard (1997) FLC 92-771
Bryant & Bryant (1996) FLC 92-690
Gyselman & Gyselman (1992) FLC 92-279
Penfold v Penfold (1980) 144 CLR 311

Applicant: T G

Respondent: L G

File No: MLM 6508 of 2003

Delivered on: 7 January 2004

Delivered at: Melbourne

Hearing Date: 5 January 2004

Judgment of: Bryant CFM

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: In person

Solicitors for the Applicant: In person

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr Sweeney

Solicitors for the Respondent: Lander & Rogers

ORDERS

1. That all applications be dismissed.

2. That the husband pay the wife's costs of and incidental to these proceedings, if not agreed to be taxed on the Family Law Scale.

3. That the tendered documents be returned to the parties tendering the same at the expiration of 30 days unless leave to appeal has otherwise been sought.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
MELBOURNE

MLM 6508 of 2003

T G

Applicant

and

L G

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(  Revised from transcript)

Introduction

1. This matter concerns an application by the husband filed 29 September 2003 to vary a child support agreement made on 21 January 2002 between the parties (the agreement).  The agreement provides for the husband to pay periodic child support for the two children of the relationship in sums increasing from $50 per week per child in 2002 and rising to $175 per week in 2006.  At present the amount payable is $300 per week, apportioned equally between the children.  The agreement also provides for the husband to pay school fees, uniforms and extracurricular activities but the children do not attend private schools and no payments for such expenses have been paid nor are apparently sought.

2. The husband seeks to depart from the assessment created by the agreement and to have the agreement discharged.  In lieu he seeks to pay child support based upon an administrative assessment of child support pursuant to the provisions of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) (the Act).

3. It was with some difficulty that I elicited from the husband the amount that he expected he would be paying if the provisions of the…