Hanlon and Child Support Registrar (Child support)

Mr Hanlon applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for an extension of time to seek a review of a decision made by the Child Support Registrar. The Registrar had varied Mr Hanlon's child support assessment, significantly increasing his liability by adjusting his estimated taxable income from $0 to $130,596. Mr Hanlon objected to this decision, but his objection was disallowed by the Registrar on 17 August 2017. He was notified that he had 28 days to apply for an AAT review, but he lodged his application for review, along with an application for an extension of time, on 26 June 2018, well outside the prescribed period.

The AAT was required to determine whether to grant Mr Hanlon an extension of time to lodge his application for review. In considering this, the Tribunal had regard to general case law concerning applications for extensions of time, including the importance of an adequate explanation for the delay and the merits of the underlying objection. The AAT noted that there is a presumption against allowing applications lodged out of time, and that the power to extend time should not frustrate the purpose of statutory time limits.

The Tribunal found that Mr Hanlon's explanation for the delay was not adequate. He claimed that a Child Support Agency delegate had advised him that an AAT review was unlikely to be successful, leading him to believe there was little point in applying. However, the AAT noted a lack of corroborating evidence for this conversation and concluded that, at best, Mr Hanlon had placed unreasonable weight on the delegate's opinion. The AAT reasoned that a decision-maker cannot reasonably be expected to provide an independent assessment of their own decision's merits. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that the merits of the objection were neutral, as the original decision appeared to have been made with regard to relevant evidence and appropriate process, without obvious error.

Consequently, the AAT declined to grant Mr Hanlon's application for an extension of time. As the application was lodged out of time and not validly made, the Tribunal was unable to proceed with the review of the Child Support Registrar's decision.