Geldart and Rearick (Child support)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Geldart for a departure determination regarding the child support administrative assessment for Mr Rearick. The dispute centred on Mr Rearick's earning capacity, with Ms Geldart contending that his income had not been correctly reflected in the assessment, making the determination unjust and inequitable. The case was heard by Member C Breheny.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Mr Rearick's earning capacity, from 1 July 2023 onwards, was accurately reflected in the administrative assessment. This required the court to consider the evidence presented regarding Mr Rearick's efforts to obtain employment, his qualifications, and any barriers he faced in securing suitable long-term work, to determine if the existing assessment was unjust and inequitable.

Member Breheny considered evidence indicating Mr Rearick had significant barriers to obtaining full-time employment, including difficulties with unfamiliar software and a lack of recent experience in his previous occupation. While acknowledging a prior tribunal finding of additional earning capacity, the court noted its jurisdiction was limited to the period from 1 July 2023. Despite Mr Rearick's resignation from employment in March 2023, the court accepted his evidence that his job applications, including in his former sector, had been unsuccessful due to a lack of current skills. The court found that paragraph 117(7B)(a) of the Act was satisfied, as Mr Rearick was not working and there was no evidence that his decision was justified by caring responsibilities, given the age of his children and their school attendance. Although evidence of psychological and rehabilitation counselling was presented, it was not considered specific enough to establish a diagnosed illness impacting his capacity to work.

The court affirmed the decision regarding Mr Rearick's earning capacity from 1 July 2023, finding that the existing assessment was not unjust and inequitable.