Liao and Arika (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia regarding child support payments. The appellant, Liao, sought to have certain payments made to the respondent, Arika, considered as child support payments. The central dispute revolved around whether these payments, made outside the formal child support agency system, were intended by both parents to be in lieu of statutory child support obligations.

The Full Court was required to determine whether the payments made by Liao to Arika met the conditions for being considered "prescribed payments" under the relevant legislation, specifically whether the intention of both parties was for these payments to discharge Liao's child support liability. The court also had to consider whether the primary judge erred in finding that such an intention was not established.

The Full Court affirmed the decision of the primary judge, holding that the conditions for treating the payments as prescribed child support payments were not met. The court reasoned that for payments made outside the agency to be considered in lieu of child support, there must be a clear and unequivocal intention on the part of *both* parents that the payments would satisfy the child support obligation. In this instance, the evidence did not establish that both Liao and Arika shared this common intention. Consequently, the payments could not be retrospectively credited against Liao's child support debt.