Hewett and Johnson and Anor

Link copied
Case Copied 18 min read

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HEWETT & JOHNSON & ANOR [2012] FMCAfam 1079
CHILD SUPPORT – Application – overpayment of child support – whether a gift to the payee – whether payer intended overpayment to be credited against ongoing liability for child support – declaratory relief – delay – whether excessive and unwarranted delay – discretion of the court.
Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988, ss.30, 67, 74, 75
John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Police Tribunal of New South Wales (1986) 5 NSWLR 465
The King v Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration; Ex parte Ozone Theatres (Aust) Ltd (1949) 78 CLR 389
Klewer v Walton [2003] NSWCA 308
Applicant: MR HEWETT
First Respondent: MS JOHNSON
Second Respondent: CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR
File Number: SYC 2549 of 2010
Judgment of: Scarlett FM
Hearing dates: 13 March, 5 June 2012
Date of Last Submission: 5 June 2012
Delivered at: Sydney
Delivered on: 9 October 2012

REPRESENTATION

Solicitor for the Applicant: Mr Benetatos
Solicitors for the Applicant: Benetatos White
Counsel for the first Respondent: In person
Solicitors for the first Respondent: No solicitor
Counsel for the second Respondent: Mr Kaplan
Solicitors for the second Respondent: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

  1. Order 1 made on 7 December 2010 is discharged.

  2. The Second Respondent Child Support Registrar reduce the amount of child support calculated as being due and payable by the Applicant by the sum of $12,985.43 with effect from 2 December 2004.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Hewett & Johnson & Anor is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 2549 of 2010

MR HEWETT

Applicant

And

MS JOHNSON

First Respondent

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Application

  1. This is an Application by the payer of child support to reduce the amount calculated as owing by an amount of $12,985.43. The Application is opposed by the First Respondent, the payee, and the Second Respondent, the Child Support Registrar. The child support relates to the daughter of the Applicant and the First Respondent, who was born [in] 1997 and is now 15 years of age.

  2. On 7th December 2010 orders in respect of arrears of child support and late payment penalties were stayed to the extent of $19,560.34.

Background

  1. On 27th April 2010 the Child Support Registrar filed a summons against the Applicant, claiming that he was indebted to the Commonwealth under s.30 of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 for an amount of $25,845.59 by way of arrears of child support payments and an amount of $8,129.02 by way of late payment penalties under s.67 of the Act.

  2. On 7th June 2010 the Applicant and the Child Support Registrar entered into consent orders:

    a)declaring that the Applicant (who is the Respondent in the summons brought by the Child Support Registrar) owed the sum of $35,571.34 consisting of arrears of $26,956.43 and late payment penalties of $8,614.91;

    b)the Applicant…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Hewett and Johnson and Anor and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2012] FMCAfam 1079
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved a dispute between Hewett and Johnson and another party, referred to as the Second Respondent, which centred on the calculation of child support payments. The Family Court of Australia was tasked with reviewing and determining the correctness of the child support assessment made by the Child Support Registrar. The Applicant, Hewett, sought a reduction in the amount of child support deemed payable, arguing that the Registrar's calculations were erroneous.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the Child Support Registrar's calculation of the child support liability was correct or if there were errors that warranted a reduction in the amount deemed payable. Specifically, the Applicant argued that the Registrar had incorrectly calculated the income of the Second Respondent, leading to an overestimation of the child support liability. The court had to assess the evidence and arguments presented by both parties to determine the accuracy of the Registrar's assessment and the appropriate adjustments, if any, to the child support amount.

The court examined the evidence and submissions from both parties, focusing on the income details of the Second Respondent and the corresponding child support calculations. It found that there were errors in the Registrar's assessment, leading to an overestimation of the child support liability. Consequently, the court ruled that the amount of child support calculated as being due and payable by the Applicant should be reduced by $12,985.43, effective from 2 December 2004. The court also discharged Order 1 made on 7 December 2010, reflecting its determination.

Orders

Orders of the court

1.

Order 1 made on 7 December 2010 is discharged.

2.

The Second Respondent Child Support Registrar reduce the amount of child support calculated as being due and payable by the Applicant by the sum of $12,985.43 with effect from 2 December 2004.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.