Harrolds and Child Support Registrar (Child support)
Case
•
[2019] AATA 566
•6 March 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Harrolds and Child Support Registrar (Child support) [2019] AATA 566
[2019] AATA 566
6 March 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the dispute between Harrolds and the Child Support Registrar concerning the percentage of care arrangements for a child. The core of the disagreement revolved around whether there had been a change to the likely pattern of care, leading to the revocation of existing percentage of care determinations and the making of new ones.
The Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, it had to ascertain whether a change to the likely pattern of care had occurred, justifying the revocation and substitution of existing care percentage determinations. Secondly, the Tribunal needed to decide whether special circumstances existed that prevented the objection from being lodged within the prescribed time limits, and if so, whether to set aside the original decision and substitute a new one.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal found that special circumstances did indeed exist, which prevented the objection from being lodged in time. This finding allowed the Tribunal to set aside the previous decision and substitute it with a new determination regarding the percentage of care. The Tribunal also considered the date of effect for its decision, again finding that special circumstances warranted making a determination under subsection 95N(2) of the relevant Act, which allows for a review to be lodged out of time.
The Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, it had to ascertain whether a change to the likely pattern of care had occurred, justifying the revocation and substitution of existing care percentage determinations. Secondly, the Tribunal needed to decide whether special circumstances existed that prevented the objection from being lodged within the prescribed time limits, and if so, whether to set aside the original decision and substitute a new one.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal found that special circumstances did indeed exist, which prevented the objection from being lodged in time. This finding allowed the Tribunal to set aside the previous decision and substitute it with a new determination regarding the percentage of care. The Tribunal also considered the date of effect for its decision, again finding that special circumstances warranted making a determination under subsection 95N(2) of the relevant Act, which allows for a review to be lodged out of time.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Remedies
-
Standing
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0