Parisi and Wouter (Child support) - [2019] AATA 3842

Parisi and Wouter (Child support) [2019] AATA 3842 (5 August 2019)

DIVISION:Social Services & Child Support Division
REVIEW NUMBER:  2018/PC015124
APPLICANT:  Ms Parisi
OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar
Mr Wouter

TRIBUNAL:Senior Member R Ellis
DECISION DATE: 05 August 2019
DECISION:

The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and, in substitution, decides that:

for the period from 8 May 2018 until 31 December 2020 the adjusted taxable income for Ms Parisi is varied to $187,480 per annum; and
for the period from 8 May 2018 until 30 September 2019 the adjusted taxable income for Mr Wouter is varied to $52,039.

CATCHWORDS
CHILD SUPPORT – departure determination – income, property and financial resources of both parents – benefits derived from business – whether property settlement affects child support – 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 removed from this decision and replaced with generic information so as not to identify involved individuals as required by subsections 16(2AB)-16(2AC) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

REASONS FOR DECISION

BACKGROUND

This review is about whether or not there should be a departure from the administrative assessment of child support.
Ms Parisi and Mr Wouter are the parents of [Child 1] (born January 2013) and [Child 2] (born July 2015). There has been a child support assessment in place since 6 July 2017 and Ms Parisi is the liable parent.
The following administrative assessment is under consideration:
· for the period from 19 April 2018 to 5 October 2018 the annual rate of child support payable was $688 based on Ms Parisi’s 2016–17 adjusted taxable income of $44,721 and Mr Wouter’s 2016–17 adjusted taxable income of $48,913.
On 8 May 2018 Mr Wouter applied to the Department of Human Services, Child Support (the Child Support Agency) for a change to the assessment and Ms Parisi made a cross application which she later withdrew. On 26 June 2018 the Child Support Agency made the decision to change the assessment so that:
· for the period from 8 May 2018 to 30 June 2023 Ms Parisi’s adjusted taxable income is set at $115,409; and
· for the period from 8 May 2018 to 31 October 2019 Mr Wouter’s adjusted taxable income is set at $59,200.
This was done on the basis of the income, property and financial resources of both Ms Parisi and Mr Wouter (the ground commonly referred to as Reason 8A).
On 28 July 2018 Ms Parisi objected to this decision and on 14 September 2018 the Child Support Agency allowed the objection in part and made the decision to change the assessment (the objection decision) so that:
· for the period from 8 May 2018 to 30 June 2023 Ms Parisi’s adjusted taxable income is set at $200,000; and
· for the period from 8 May 2018 to 31 October 2019 Mr Wouter’s adjusted taxable income is set at $59,200.
On 27…

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 Parisi and Wouter (Child support)

Details

AGLC: Parisi and Wouter (Child support) [2019] AATA 3842
Case: [2019] AATA 3842
Decision Date: 5 August 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of *Parisi and Wouter* concerned an application for a departure determination under the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988* (Cth). The applicant sought to have the assessed child support payable by the respondent varied, based on allegations concerning the income, property, and financial resources of both parents. The matter came before the court for review of a decision made by the Registrar.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the existing child support assessment should be departed from, pursuant to section 117 of the Act. This required the court to consider whether the respondent had resources that were not being taken into account in the assessment, and whether the applicant had resources that were being taken into account. Specifically, the court had to determine if the respondent's benefits derived from his business, and the impact of a property settlement between the parties, warranted a departure from the assessment.

In its reasoning, the court examined the financial circumstances of both parties, paying close attention to the income and financial resources available to the respondent through his business interests. The court also considered the effect of the property settlement on the financial positions of both the applicant and the respondent. The court applied the principles of the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988*, particularly those relating to departure determinations, to assess whether the current assessment was fair and equitable given the parties' overall financial positions and the benefits derived from the respondent's business.

The court set aside the decision under review and substituted its own determination.

Orders