Hitchins and Hitchins (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal by the father against a decision of the Child Support Registrar concerning the assessment of child support. The dispute centred on whether certain tutoring fees paid by the father constituted a "non-agency payment" that should be credited against his child support liability. The appeal was heard by Member S Letch of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the payments made by the father for his child's tutoring fees were made with the mutual intention of both parents that they would be treated as child support. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if there was an agreement or understanding between the parents that these payments would discharge, in whole or in part, the father's child support obligations.

Member Letch affirmed the Registrar's decision, finding that there was no evidence of mutual intent between the parties that the tutoring fees would be treated as child support. The Tribunal applied the principle that for a non-agency payment to be credited against child support, there must be a clear and demonstrable mutual intention between both parents that the payment would be in lieu of, or contribute to, the child support assessment. In this instance, the father had unilaterally decided to pay for the tutoring and had not obtained the mother's agreement that these payments would offset his child support liability. The Tribunal concluded that the payments were made for the child's benefit but lacked the requisite mutual intent to qualify as a non-agency payment under the relevant legislation.