Jordan and Instone (Child support)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the dispute between Jordan and Instone concerning the percentage of care for a child. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether there had been a change to the likely pattern of care that would warrant revoking existing percentage of care determinations and making new ones. The Tribunal also had to determine whether there were special circumstances that prevented the objection from being lodged within the prescribed time.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were twofold: first, whether the evidence established a change in the likely pattern of care sufficient to justify a revocation and substitution of existing percentage of care determinations; and second, whether the applicant had demonstrated special circumstances that would permit the late lodgement of an objection.

The Tribunal found that the evidence did not establish a change to the likely pattern of care that would justify revoking the existing determinations. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted it with a new decision that the existing percentage of care determinations should not be revoked. Regarding the late objection, the Tribunal determined that no special circumstances existed that prevented the objection from being lodged in time, and therefore affirmed the decision under review in relation to the date of effect provisions.