Parkin and Hunter (Child support) - [2024] ARTA 208

Parkin and Hunter (Child support) [2024] ARTA 208 (4 November 2024)

Applicant/s: Mr Parkin

Respondent: Child Support Registrar

Other Parties: Miss Hunter
Tribunal Number: 2024/AC027552
Tribunal: General Member P Noonan
Place:Melbourne
Date:04 November 2024

Decision:
The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and in substitution decides that: for the period 7 October 2023 to 31 March 2026, Mr Parkin’s adjusted taxable income is varied to $98,752.00 per annum.

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – departure determination – income, property and financial resources – Adjusted Taxable Income – personal taxation return – benefits derived from business – depreciation – 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

Mr Parkin and Miss Hunter are the parents of one child currently relevant to the child support assessment under review.
A child support case was first registered with Services Australia – Child Support (Child Support) on 30 March 2016 and child support has been registered for collection by Child Support from 1 December 2020. Child Support currently maintains a case completion date for this matter of 14 July 2033.
On 2 August 2023 Miss Hunter applied for a change to the assessment which at that time was for the period 7 October 2023 to 6 November 2023 and Mr Parkin was assessed to pay child support of $10,760 per annum based on his 2022/23 provisional income of $124,442 and Miss Hunter’s 2022/23 adjusted taxable income (ATI) of $38,729.
On 13 November 2023, a Child Support officer, acting as a delegate of the Registrar, found that a ground for departure was established in the following terms: “For the period 7 October 2023 to 30 April 2025, the ATI of Mr Parkin is set at $99,752 per annum”.
Mr Parkin objected to this decision and on 16 February 2024 the objections officer decided to partially allow the objection and depart from the assessment in the following terms: “For the period 7 October 2023 until 31 October 2025, the Adjusted Taxable Income (ATI) for Mr Parkin shall be set at $115,178”.
On 22 February 2024 Mr Parkin applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for an independent hearing of Child Support’s decision. From 14 October 2024, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) became the Administrative Review Tribunal (the Tribunal). Under the transitional provisions in the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Act 2024 (the Transitional Act), applications for review to the AAT that were not finalised before 14 October 2024 are taken to be an application for review to the Tribunal. The Transitional Act gives the Tribunal the authority to continue and finalise any aspect of the review not already completed by the AAT. This decision and statement of reasons is made by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal dismissed Mr Parkin’s…

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 Parkin and Hunter (Child support)

Details

AGLC: Parkin and Hunter (Child support) [2024] ARTA 208
Case: [2024] ARTA 208
Decision Date: 4 November 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Parkin and Hunter (Child Support), the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) was tasked with reviewing a child support assessment issued by the Child Support Registrar. The applicant, Mr Parkin, challenged the assessment, contending that it did not accurately reflect his financial capacity to contribute to child support. The Tribunal held a hearing on 4 November 2024 to consider the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The primary legal issues revolved around whether there were special circumstances justifying a departure from the administrative assessment of Mr Parkin's adjusted taxable income (ATI) and whether such a departure would be just and equitable, considering the best interests of the child.

The Tribunal meticulously examined Mr Parkin's business financials and personal tax returns to determine his actual financial resources. It was established that Mr Parkin's business had significant profits and claimed depreciation expenses which, when evaluated, revealed additional financial resources not reflected in his taxable income. The Tribunal found that the depreciation claims, along with other business-related benefits, amounted to approximately $15,346.00 per annum. Moreover, Mr Parkin's use of the business to cover personal expenses for a motor vehicle and utilities was considered, adding another $9,000.00 per annum to his available financial resources. The Tribunal concluded that these factors justified a departure from the administrative assessment, resulting in an adjusted taxable income of $98,752.00 per annum for Mr Parkin.

The Tribunal also considered whether the proposed departure was just and equitable. It examined Miss Hunter's financial situation, which primarily consisted of single parenting payments and child support. Given her limited financial resources and expenses, the Tribunal found no basis to adjust her assessed income. The Tribunal determined that reducing Mr Parkin's child support obligation to approximately $8,239.00 per annum was fair and equitable, taking into account both parents' financial situations and the child's needs. The Tribunal was satisfied that neither parent nor the child would face undue hardship as a result of the departure.

The Tribunal concluded that the proposed departure was not only just and equitable but also otherwise proper, as it aligned with the principles of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, ensuring children receive appropriate financial support according to their parents' capacity to pay. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the original decision and substituted it with a new determination that Mr Parkin's adjusted taxable income would be $98,752.00 per annum for the period from 7 October 2023 to 31 March 2026.

Orders