Howard and Chorlton (Child support) - [2025] ARTA 619

Howard and Chorlton (Child support) [2025] ARTA 619 (13 March 2025)

Applicant: Miss Howard

Respondent: Child Support Registrar

Other Parties: Mr Chorlton
Tribunal Number: 2024/BC028720
Tribunal:Member S Letch
Place:Brisbane
Date:13 March 2025

Decision:The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and in substitution decides that:
(a) care for [Child 1] is to be recorded as 72% to Miss Howard and 28% to Mr Chorlton from 8 September 2020 (notified on 9 April 2024);
(b) care for [Child 1] is to be recorded as 65% to Miss Howard and 35% to Mr Chorlton from 14 April 2021 (notified on 9 April 2024).

Names used in all published decisions are pseudonyms. Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision and replaced with generic information pursuant to subsection 16(2AB) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

Statement of Reasons

Miss Howard and Mr Chorlton are the parents of [Child 1]. This matter concerns a decision by Child Support about his recorded care.
It is convenient by way of background to set out some extracts from the objections officer’s decision dated 10 October 2024:
…
SUMMARY OF OBJECTION DECISION
The outcome of this decision is that it has been allowed.
We have made the decision to refuse the Family Assistance Office (FAO) decision to apply the care for [Child 1] as 76% to Miss Howard and 24% to Mr Chorlton from 1 June 2020, notified 9 April 2024.
The effect of the objection decision is: a reduction to the annual rate of Child Support payable by Mr Chorlton from 9 April 2024.
DECISION UNDER REVIEW
The decision made on 2 July 2024 to apply the Family Assistance Office (FAO) decision to accept the care for [Child 1] as 76% to Miss Howard and 24% to Mr Chorlton from 1 June 2020, notified 9 April 2024.
…
The existing level of care recorded for [Child 1] was 50% to Miss Howard and 50% to Mr Chorlton from 18 January 2020.
On 2 July 2024, we applied the Family Assistance Office (FAO) decision to accept [Child 1]'s care as 76% to Miss Howard and 24% to Mr Chorlton from 1 June 2020, notified on 9 April 2024.
On 22 July 2024, Mr Chorlton objected to this decision on the grounds noted above.
…
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
The percentage of care is the mechanism used in the child support assessment formula to take into account the amount of time a parent or non-parent carer is responsible for providing care for the child.
Care will generally be worked out based on the number of nights that the child is likely to be in the care of the person during the care period (CSA Act section 54A).
FAO can make care percentage decisions which can also apply for child support purposes.
In this case, on 2 July 2024 we made the decision to accept the care determination made by FAO to accept [Child 1]'s care as 76%…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Howard and Chorlton (Child support) 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: [2025] ARTA 619
Decision Date: 13 March 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Miss Howard and Mr Chorlton are parents to [Child 1]. This matter concerns a decision by the Child Support Registrar regarding the recorded care percentage for [Child 1]. The dispute centres on the percentage of care attributed to each parent for the purposes of calculating child support. The case was heard and determined by Member S Letch of the Administrative Review Tribunal in Brisbane on 13 March 2025.

The central legal issue in this case was the determination of the correct percentage of care for [Child 1], given the changing patterns of care over time. Specifically, the Tribunal needed to decide whether the decision of the Child Support Registrar, which accepted a Family Assistance Office (FAO) determination of care, was correct. Mr Chorlton objected to this decision, arguing that the care arrangement had always been 50/50. The Tribunal had to assess the evidence and decide whether there was a change in the pattern of care that warranted a change in the recorded percentages.

The Tribunal found that there was indeed a change in the pattern of care. Based on the evidence presented, the Tribunal determined that the care for [Child 1] should be recorded as 72% to Miss Howard and 28% to Mr Chorlton from 8 September 2020, and 65% to Miss Howard and 35% to Mr Chorlton from 14 April 2021. These changes were notified to Child Support on 9 April 2024. The Tribunal set aside the original decision and substituted it with the new percentages, finding that the objections officer had not correctly applied the law in this context.

The Tribunal’s decision was based on the principle that changes in the pattern of care should be reflected in the recorded care percentages. The Tribunal considered the evidence from both parties and concluded that the changes in care arrangements warranted a revision of the recorded care percentages. The Tribunal noted that the ad hoc additional nights identified by Mr Chorlton did not significantly alter the general pattern of care. The final orders of the Tribunal were that care for [Child 1] is to be recorded as 72% to Miss Howard and 28% to Mr Chorlton from 8 September 2020, and 65% to Miss Howard and 35% to Mr Chorlton from 14 April 2021.

Orders