Hembree and Child Support Registrar (Child support)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for an extension of time made by Ms Hembree, the applicant, to seek a review of a decision made by the Child Support Registrar. Ms Hembree sought to have the AAT consider her application for review of the Registrar's decision of 12 October 2023, which disallowed her objection to a child support assessment, despite the statutory period for lodging such an application having expired. The Child Support Registrar was the other party to the proceedings.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it should grant Ms Hembree an extension of time to lodge her application for review of the Registrar's decision. This required the Tribunal to consider the provisions of section 29 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, which stipulates a 28-day time limit for lodging review requests, and section 91 of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988, which allows for applications to be treated as if duly lodged within time upon request. The Tribunal was required to determine if it was fair and equitable to permit the late lodgement, balancing various factors including the reasons for the delay, the merits of the substantive application, and potential prejudice to the parties and the public.

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal applied the principles established in cases such as *Brisbane South Regional Health Authority v Taylor* and *Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Cohen*. It considered the reasons for Ms Hembree's delay, finding that while she had adequate reasons for lodging her application eight days late and had not rested on her rights, the merits of her substantive application were limited. The Tribunal noted that a previous decision had varied the father's adjusted taxable income to $150,000 for a relevant period, and that Ms Hembree's current application did not present compelling evidence to suggest a different outcome would be reached. While there was minimal prejudice to the other party, the Tribunal found that granting an extension would cause prejudice to the wider public through unnecessary administrative costs and undermining the finality of decisions.

Weighing all relevant factors, the Tribunal concluded that it was not fair and equitable to extend the permissible time for Ms Hembree to lodge her application. Consequently, the Tribunal refused the extension application.