Jennings and Bramley (Child support)
Case
•
[2018] AATA 960
•5 March 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Jennings and Bramley (Child support) [2018] AATA 960
[2018] AATA 960
5 March 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an appeal by Jennings and Bramley concerning child support assessments. The dispute centred on the revocation of existing determinations of care percentages and the making of new determinations. The applicants sought to challenge decisions made by the Child Support Registrar.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Registrar had erred in refusing to make a determination under subsection 87AA(2) of the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988*. This refusal was based on the Registrar’s finding that there were no special circumstances that prevented the lodgment of objections within the prescribed time. The core legal issue was therefore the date of effect of the objection decisions and whether the applicants had established grounds for late lodgment.
The Tribunal affirmed the Registrar's decisions. It found that the applicants had not demonstrated the existence of special circumstances that would justify the late lodgment of their objections. Consequently, the Registrar was correct in refusing to make a determination under subsection 87AA(2) and in affirming the original care percentage determinations. The Tribunal concluded that the decisions under review were not affected by error.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Registrar had erred in refusing to make a determination under subsection 87AA(2) of the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988*. This refusal was based on the Registrar’s finding that there were no special circumstances that prevented the lodgment of objections within the prescribed time. The core legal issue was therefore the date of effect of the objection decisions and whether the applicants had established grounds for late lodgment.
The Tribunal affirmed the Registrar's decisions. It found that the applicants had not demonstrated the existence of special circumstances that would justify the late lodgment of their objections. Consequently, the Registrar was correct in refusing to make a determination under subsection 87AA(2) and in affirming the original care percentage determinations. The Tribunal concluded that the decisions under review were not affected by error.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Statutory Construction
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0