Kendall and Child Support Registrar (Child support)

Case

[2018] AATA 527

2 February 2018


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Kendall and Child Support Registrar (Child support) [2018] AATA 527 [2018] AATA 527 2 February 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision of the Child Support Registrar concerning the percentage of care attributed to the applicant, Ms. Kendall, for her child. The dispute centred on whether Ms. Kendall had taken reasonable action to obtain compliance with the child support assessment, which was a prerequisite for her to be considered for a departure from the standard assessment based on the percentage of care. The Registrar had determined that Ms. Kendall had not taken such reasonable action.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Ms. Kendall had taken reasonable action to obtain compliance with the child support assessment. This involved considering the specific steps she had taken, or failed to take, in relation to the other parent's obligations under the assessment. The Tribunal also had to assess whether there were any special circumstances that would justify a departure from the usual rules regarding the percentage of care, particularly in light of the Registrar's finding.

The Tribunal affirmed the Registrar's decision, finding that Ms. Kendall had not demonstrated that she had taken reasonable action to obtain compliance with the child support assessment. The Tribunal considered the evidence presented and concluded that the actions taken by Ms. Kendall were insufficient to meet the threshold of "reasonable action" as contemplated by the relevant legislation. Consequently, the Tribunal found no special circumstances that would warrant a departure from the interim determination that had been applied.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Family Law

  • Administrative Law

Legal Concepts

  • Jurisdiction

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

0