Garnaut v Child Support Registrar - [2004] FCA 1100

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Garnaut v Child Support Registrar [2004] FCA 1100
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – child support – application for order of review of the decision of a delegate of the respondent to disallow an objection – Part 6B of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) – limitations of judicial review – change of assessment application – plethora of material – whether delegate of respondent conducted full merits review as required – consequence of decision not being made within sixty days of objection being lodged – whether relevant considerations not taken into account – whether reconsideration by same delegate is a breach of natural justice – whether negligence or breach of statutory duty claim part of same matter – whether arguable case
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) Schedule 1
Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) ss 65, 98B, 98C(2), 98Z, 98ZA, 98ZB, 98ZC, 98ZD, 98ZE, 98ZH, 98X, 117(2)
Wentworth v Rogers (No 5) (1986) 6 NSWLR 536 referred to
Waterford v Commonwealth of Australia (1986-1987) 163 CLR 54 referred to
Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355 referred to
PATRICIA ANNE GARNAUT v CATHERINE ARGALL, CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
No Q 107 of 2003
SPENDER J
BRISBANE
25 AUGUST 2004

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY

Q 107 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

PATRICIA ANNE GARNAUT
APPLICANT

AND:

CATHERINE ARGALL, CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

SPENDER J

DATE OF ORDER:

25 AUGUST 2004

WHERE MADE:

BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The application for an order of review be dismissed.

THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:
1.The respondent file and serve any submission with respect to costs within seven days.
2.The applicant file and serve any submissions with respect to costs within fourteen days.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY

Q 107 OF 2003

BETWEEN:

PATRICIA ANNE GARNAUT
APPLICANT

AND:

CATHERINE ARGALL, CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

SPENDER J

DATE:

25 AUGUST 2004

PLACE:

BRISBANE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

On 22 July 2003, the applicant (“Ms Garnaut”) filed an application for an order of review. The relief sought appears to be judicial review pursuant to the provisions of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) (“the ADJR Act”), although this is nowhere expressly stated. The decision which she seeks to have reviewed is a decision of Christopher Scott, a delegate of the Child Support Registrar, dated 20 June 2003. In that decision, Mr Scott disallowed an objection by the applicant to a decision made on 10 April 2002 by Ms Lisa O’Neill relating to a change of assessment application lodged pursuant to the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cth) (“the Assessment Act”). In the decision of 20 June 2003, Mr Scott also disallowed an objection by Mr Graham Boyd to the change of assessment decision of 10 April 2002.
Mr Scott had previously made a decision, on 24 October 2002, disallowing the objections…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Garnaut v Child Support Registrar and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2004] FCA 1100
Decision Date: 25 AUGUST 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Garnaut v Child Support Registrar, the applicant sought a review of a decision made by the respondent regarding child support payments. The matter was heard and determined by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. The applicant contested the amount of child support assessed and paid by the respondent, claiming that the calculation was incorrect and that the amount owed was less than that determined by the respondent.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the respondent had correctly applied the relevant legislative and regulatory framework in determining the amount of child support payable. This involved an examination of the applicable statutory provisions and guidelines, as well as the administrative processes followed by the respondent. The court was also required to consider whether any errors made by the respondent were material and whether they warranted a review of the decision.

After a thorough review of the evidence and applicable law, the court determined that the respondent had correctly applied the relevant legislative and regulatory framework in making the child support assessment. The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated that the respondent had made any errors in the calculation of child support, and that any discrepancies in the amounts paid were due to voluntary payments made by the applicant. The court held that the respondent's decision was not reviewable and dismissed the applicant's application accordingly. The court directed that the respondent file and serve any submissions with respect to costs within seven days, and that the applicant file and serve any submissions with respect to costs within fourteen days.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application for an order of review be dismissed.

THE COURT DIRECTS THAT:

1. The respondent file and serve any submission with respect to costs within seven days.

2. The applicant file and serve any submissions with respect to costs within fourteen days.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

SPENDER J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: SPENDER J

Full text does not contain this section.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY	Q 107 OF 2003

BETWEEN:	PATRICIA ANNE GARNAUT APPLICANT
AND:	CATHERINE ARGALL, CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	SPENDER J
DATE OF ORDER:	25 AUGUST 2004
WHERE MADE:	BRISBANE

JUDGE:	SPENDER J
DATE:	25 AUGUST 2004
PLACE:	BRISBANE