NPLR and Child Support Registrar (Child support second review)

This matter concerned an application for an extension of time to seek a review of a child support objection decision. The applicant sought to challenge the Child Support Registrar's decision regarding the adjustable taxable income of both parents and the resulting child support assessment. The dispute centred on whether the applicant had provided sufficient grounds and demonstrated a reasonable prospect of success to warrant an extension of time, despite a moderate delay in lodging the application.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether to grant the applicant an extension of time to lodge her application for review. This involved considering the length of the delay, the explanation provided for the delay, the applicant's awareness of her review rights, and whether granting the extension would cause prejudice to the Child Support Registrar. The Tribunal also had to assess the prospects of success of the substantive application for review, particularly in light of new information the applicant claimed had become available after the objection decision was made.

Deputy President Sosso P applied the principles for granting an extension of time, noting that while a statutory basis was absent, established judicial considerations provided a useful framework. The Tribunal found the delay of 38 days to be of moderate length and, crucially, not contested as causing prejudice to the Registrar. The applicant explained her delay by stating she was unaware of the objection decision notice due to a switch to electronic communication, and that significant information regarding the other party's income only became available after the 28-day review period had expired. The Tribunal considered this explanation, along with the applicant's detailed grounds for review, which included claims that the other party had returned to work and had not updated his income details, and that the assessment did not accurately reflect his earning capacity and financial resources.

The Tribunal granted the extension of time. This decision was based on the moderate delay, the plausible explanation provided by the applicant for that delay, the lack of prejudice to the Registrar, and the applicant's stated grounds for review which suggested arguable issues regarding the accuracy of the child support assessment.