Irestone and Irestone (Child support)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the dispute between the parties, referred to as Irestone and Irestone (Child support), concerning the percentage of care arrangements for their child. The applicant sought to set aside a decision made by the Registrar of the Child Support Registrar, which had revoked existing percentage of care determinations and made new ones. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the pre-existing court-ordered care pattern had been followed and the reliability of the records presented to support the claimed care percentages.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Registrar's decision to revoke the existing percentage of care determinations was justified. This involved assessing whether the parties had failed to follow the pre-existing court-ordered care pattern, and if so, whether this failure warranted the revocation. Furthermore, the Tribunal had to consider the reliability and weight to be given to the records of care provided by the parties in making new percentage of care determinations.

Member J Thomson found that the evidence presented did not demonstrate a consistent adherence to the court-ordered care pattern. The records of care were found to be unreliable and insufficient to establish the actual care provided. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the Registrar's decision to revoke the existing determinations and make new ones was appropriate. The Tribunal set aside the Registrar's decision and substituted its own, making new percentage of care determinations based on the evidence before it.