Micaten and Micaten (Child support)

This matter concerned an application by the father, Mr Micaten, seeking to have certain payments he made to his former partner, Ms Micaten, recognised as prescribed non-agency payments for the purposes of child support. The decision under review, made by the Registrar, had not accepted these payments.

The primary legal issue before Senior Member Dordevic was whether the payments made by the father to the mother, which were not made through the Child Support Agency, constituted prescribed non-agency payments that should be credited against his child support liability.

Senior Member Dordevic reasoned that for a payment to be considered a prescribed non-agency payment, it must be made directly to the payee (the mother) and be for the benefit of the child. The evidence presented indicated that the father had made payments directly to the mother, and these payments were intended to cover expenses related to the children. Therefore, the Registrar’s decision to not accept these payments was set aside and substituted with a decision that recognised them as prescribed non-agency payments.