Jenson and Jenson (Child support)

The case of *Jenson and Jenson (Child Support)* concerned an application to depart from a child support administrative assessment. The primary dispute involved the father's adjusted taxable income and the extent to which certain financial benefits derived from his business should be considered in the child support calculation. The matter came before Member E Kidston of the [relevant tribunal or court].

The court was required to determine whether it had jurisdiction to consider the father's claim of procedural unfairness in relation to the assessment. Furthermore, the court had to decide whether the existing assessment was inaccurate and unfair, particularly in light of the father's self-employment, the use of company structures, changes in his accounting arrangements, and ongoing proceedings in the Family Court and with the Australian Taxation Office. A key issue was whether the father received significantly higher additional financial benefits from his business than were reflected in the administrative assessment, and whether the mother and child would suffer hardship if a departure determination was not made.

Member Kidston reasoned that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to consider the father's claim of procedural unfairness, as this fell outside the scope of the child support legislation governing departure from assessments. However, the Member found that the administrative assessment was indeed inaccurate and unfair. This conclusion was based on evidence demonstrating that the father received substantial financial benefits from his business that were not adequately captured by the assessment. The court applied the principles of the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988*, focusing on the need to ensure assessments accurately reflect a parent's financial capacity and to prevent hardship.

The decision under review was set aside and substituted with a new determination that took into account the additional financial benefits received by the father, thereby ensuring a more equitable child support obligation and preventing hardship for the mother and child.