Maalouf and Makris (Child support) - [2025] ARTA 1977

Maalouf and Makris (Child support) [2025] ARTA 1977 (5 September 2025)

Applicant/s: Mr Maalouf

Respondent: Child Support Registrar

Other Parties:   Ms Makris
Tribunal Number:   2025/AC029621
Tribunal:   Member D Lambden
Place:Adelaide
Date:5 September 2025

Decision:The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and in substitution decides that there has not been a change in [Child A’s] care and Mr Maalouf and Ms Makris continue to share care on a 50/50 basis.

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – percentages of care – Federal Circuit Court of Australia order – equal shared parental responsibility – change to the care arrangement – nights of care – no relevant evidence of change – existing care determinations continue to apply – decision under review set aside and substituted 

Names used in all published decisions are pseudonyms. Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been omitted from this decision and replaced with generic information pursuant to subsection 16(2AB) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

Statement of Reasons

BACKGROUND

This review relates to a decision of Services Australia – Child Support (Child Support) on 14 March 2025 regarding the care of Mr Maalouf and Ms Makris’ child, [Child A] (the child), from 1 June 2024.
There is a Federal Circuit Court of Australia order dated [November] 2017 (page 16 to 22 of the Tribunal hearing papers) which relates to the care of the child. The order specifies that the parties have agreed to have equal shared parental responsibility for the child and the child shall live with each party approximately equally.

There has been a child support assessment in place between Mr Maalouf and Ms Makris for the child since 14 February 2017. The pre-existing care percentages for the child are 50% with Mr Maalouf and 50% with Ms Makris from 14 February 2017, notified on 19 July 2017.
On 9 July 2024 Mr Maalouf contacted Child Support online and advised that there had been a change in care for the child and he reported that care was 360 nights per year/99% to himself and 5 nights per year/1% to Ms Makris from 9 July 2024. He advised that the level of care had changed because Ms Makris advised she did not want to take care of the child financially. On 17 July 2024 Ms Makris contacted Child Support to advise of a change in the child’s care to 67% in her care and 33% in Mr Maalouf’s care from 1 February 2023. She advised that the child stays with Mr Maalouf 10 nights per month. Child Support advised that Mr Maalouf had reported a change in care on 9 July 2024 and Ms Makris stated that she disagreed with the care that Mr Maalouf had reported.
On 15 October 2024 Ms Makris provided the following evidence to Child Support:

A care calendar from June to September 2024 that supports that Mr Maalouf has an average of 11.5 nights care of the child per month
Page 2 of the court order…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Maalouf and Makris (Child support)

Details

AGLC: Maalouf and Makris (Child support) [2025] ARTA 1977
Case: [2025] ARTA 1977
Decision Date: 5 September 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) reviewed a decision of the Child Support Registrar regarding the care of Mr Maalouf and Ms Makris' child, [Child A]. The primary issue was whether there had been a change in the care arrangement for [Child A] and, if so, the new percentage of care attributable to each parent. The existing care arrangement, established by a Federal Circuit Court order dated November 2017, specified that the parents have equal shared parental responsibility for the child and that the child shall live with each party approximately equally.

The Tribunal considered the evidence provided by both parents, including care calendars, text messages, and third-party statements. Mr Maalouf claimed that there was a change in care, with him having 99% of the care and Ms Makris having only 1%. Ms Makris argued that the care arrangement had always been 50/50 and that there had been no change. The Tribunal found that the evidence provided, particularly the care calendars from January 2025, indicated that the care of the child was shared on a 50/50 basis between the parents, in line with the court order.

Given this evidence, the Tribunal concluded that there had been no change in the care arrangement for [Child A]. Therefore, the existing care determinations of 50% to Mr Maalouf and 50% to Ms Makris continued to apply. The Tribunal set aside the decision under review and substituted it with a decision that there had not been a change in [Child A]’s care, and the parents continue to share care on a 50/50 basis.

The final orders of the Tribunal were that the decision made by the Child Support Registrar on 14 March 2025 was set aside and in substitution, it was decided that there had not been a change in [Child A]’s care, and Mr Maalouf and Ms Makris continue to share care on a 50/50 basis.

Orders