Owens and Owens (Child support)

This case involved a dispute between Ms Owens and Mr Owens concerning the percentage of care for their child, [Child 1]. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) reviewed a decision made by the Child Support Registrar, which had partly allowed Ms Owens' objection to an earlier care determination. The initial determination by the Department of Human Services had established Ms Owens as having 100% care and Mr Owens 0% from December 2016. This was later revised to 50% care for each parent from April 2018. Ms Owens then objected to this revised determination, arguing the change in care was less than 50%, leading to a further decision by the Department in August 2020 that Ms Owens had 58% care and Mr Owens 42% care, effective from May 2020. Ms Owens sought a review of this decision by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the existing care determinations should be revoked and new determinations made, and if so, what the correct percentage of care should be and from what date. A further issue was whether there were special circumstances that prevented Ms Owens from lodging her objection within the prescribed 28-day period following the Department's August 2020 decision. The Tribunal considered the provisions of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 and the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988, including the criteria for revoking care determinations and the conditions under which late objections might be accepted.

The Tribunal found that the care arrangements for [Child 1] had indeed changed from April 2018, as notified by Mr Owens to Centrelink. While a parenting plan dated April 2018 suggested a 50/50 care arrangement, both parties' evidence indicated that the actual care did not consistently follow this plan. The Tribunal determined that the care period should be from 9 April 2018, and based on the evidence, including information provided by Mr Owens and his partner, concluded that Mr Owens had [Child 1] in his care for approximately 6 nights per fortnight (42%). Consequently, the Tribunal determined that Ms Owens had 58% care and Mr Owens had 42% care from 9 April 2018. Regarding the date of effect, the Tribunal found no special circumstances that prevented Ms Owens from lodging her objection within the statutory timeframe. Therefore, the decision to change the care percentages was effective from the date Ms Owens lodged her objection, which was 28 May 2020. The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review.