Jones v Child Support Registrar

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Jones v Child Support Registrar [2007] FCA 1732

IAN ROBERT DURSTON JONES v CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

NSD2186 OF 2007

EMMETT J

6 NOVEMBER 2007

SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD2186 OF 2007

BETWEEN:	IAN ROBERT DURSTON JONES Applicant
AND:	CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR Respondent

JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER:	6 NOVEMBER 2007
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The matter be listed for directions at 9.30 am on Friday, 9 November 2007.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD2186 OF 2007

BETWEEN:	IAN ROBERT DURSTON JONES Applicant
AND:	CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR Respondent
JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE:	6 NOVEMBER 2007
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. The applicant seeks a stay, under s 111C(3) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth) (the Act), of a departure prohibition order made by the respondent, the Child Support Registrar, on 31 October 2007. 

2. Section 72D(1) of the Act authorises the Registrar to make a departure prohibition order prohibiting a person from departing from Australia for a foreign country, if, relevantly:

   ·    the person has a child support liability; and

   ·    the person has not made arrangements satisfactory to the Registrar for the child support liability to be wholly discharged; and

   ·    the Registrar is satisfied that the person has persistently and without reasonable grounds failed to pay child support debts arising from a registrable maintenance liability; and

   ·    the Registrar believes on reasonable grounds, that it is desirable to make the order for the purpose of ensuring that the person does not depart from Australia for a foreign country without wholly discharging the child support liability or making arrangements satisfactory to the Registrar for the child support liability to be wholly discharged.”

3. Section 72Q(1) provides that a person aggrieved by the making of a departure prohibition order may appeal to the Federal Court of Australia or the Federal Magistrates Court against the making of the order.  Under s 72R, the jurisdiction of a Court under s 72Q must be exercised by a single judge or justice.  Under s 72S, a Court hearing an appeal under s 72Q against the making of a departure prohibition order may, in its discretion make an order setting aside the order or dismiss the appeal. 

4. The applicant has commenced a proceeding under s 72Q.  Because the applicant was about to depart Australia for Thailand, he applied ex parte for an order setting aside the departure prohibition order.  I declined to make such an order ex parte.  After the application was served, the Registrar appeared, at which time the applicant indicated that he wished to move for a stay, rather than for an order on a final basis.  The stay was opposed by the Registrar. 

5. In an appeal under s 72Q of the Act, the person aggrieved must establish that the order was…