Gold and Gold (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia regarding a decision by the Child Support Registrar. The appeal was brought by the father, Mr Gold, against the Registrar's refusal to make a departure determination under the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988* (Cth). The mother, Ms Gold, was the respondent. The dispute centred on the father's assertion that the Registrar should have departed from the administrative assessment of child support payable by him to the mother.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Registrar erred in law by failing to find that a ground for departure was established under section 117 of the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988*. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether the father had demonstrated that the assessment of his child support liability was unjust or inequitable having regard to his income, property, and financial resources, and those of the mother.

The Court affirmed the Registrar's decision not to depart from the assessment. His Honour Judge Thomson M found that the father had not discharged the onus of proving that the assessment was unjust or inequitable. The Court considered the evidence presented regarding the financial circumstances of both parties and concluded that the grounds relied upon by the father did not meet the threshold required for a departure determination under the Act. The Court applied the principles established in the case law concerning the interpretation of "unjust or inequitable" in the context of child support assessments, emphasising the need for substantial deviation from the ordinary assessment to warrant a departure.