Patrick and Patterson and Anor (SSAT Appeal) - [2013] FCCA 785

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PATRICK & PATTERSON & ANOR (SSAT APPEAL)

[2013] FCCA 785

Catchwords:
CHILD SUPPORT – Social Security Appeals Tribunal – Appeal from decision of SSAT – where appellant did not attend court – default of appearance of a party.

COSTS – Application for costs – party and party basis.

Legislation:
Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988(Cth), ss.105, 110B, 110F

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s.117
Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 rr.13.03C, 16.05

Cases cited:
Colgate Palmolive Pty Ltd v Cussons Limited (1993) 46 FCR 225
Kohan & Kohan (1993) FLC 92-340
Prantage & Prantage [2013] FamCAFC 105
SZDMD v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 126

Appellant:

MR PATRICK

First Respondent:

MS PATTERSON

Second Respondent:

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

File Number:

SYC 1484 of 2013

Judgment of:

Judge Scarlett

Hearing date:

9 July 2013

Date of Last Submission:

9 July 2013

Delivered at:

Sydney

Delivered on:

9 July 2013

REPRESENTATION

The Appellant:

No appearance

The First Respondent:

No appearance

Solicitor for the Second Respondent:

Mr Gouliaditis

Solicitors for the Second Respondent:

Australian Government Solicitor

ORDERS

The Appeal is dismissed.
The decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal made on 6 February 2013 and posted on 18 February 2013 is affirmed.
The Appellant is to pay the Second Respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $6,408.00.
I allow six (6) months to pay.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Patrick & Patterson & Anor (SSAT Appeal) is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AT LAUNCESTON

SYC 1484 of 2013

MR PATRICK

Appellant

And

MS PATTERSON

First Respondent

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Appeal

This is an Appeal against a decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal made on 6^th February and posted on 18^th February 2013. The Tribunal set aside the decision under review and sent the matter back to the Child Support Registrar for reconsideration in accordance with the direction that the Registrar is to use the exchange rate that applied on 30^th January 2012 to determine the liability arising under the Court order registered on that day.
The Appellant has not attended court for the hearing of the Appeal. He has this day sent a Statutory Declaration to the Court in which he stated that he is suffering from extreme pain when walking, standing and sitting and agrees to the case proceeding in his absence.

Litigation History

The Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal against the decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal on 20^th March 2013. The Notice was returnable on 14^th May 2013.
On the return date, the Court made the following Orders:
1.The Social Security Appeals Tribunal is removed as a party to the proceedings.
2.The First Respondent is MS PATTERSON.
3.The Second Respondent is CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR.
4.The Appellant is to file and serve an Amended Notice of Appeal…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Patrick and Patterson and Anor (SSAT Appeal) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2013] FCCA 785
Decision Date: 9 July 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an appeal from a decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT). The appellant, Patrick, did not attend the court hearing, leading to a default of appearance. The second respondent sought costs on a party and party basis.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to affirm or set aside the SSAT's decision, and consequently, whether to award costs to the second respondent. The court was required to consider the implications of the appellant's failure to appear at the hearing.

Judge Scarlett dismissed the appeal and affirmed the SSAT's decision. The court reasoned that the appellant's non-attendance meant the appeal could not proceed on its merits. Consequently, the court ordered the appellant to pay the second respondent's costs, fixed at $6,408.00, with six months allowed for payment.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Appeal is dismissed.

The decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal made on 6 February 2013 and posted on 18 February 2013 is affirmed.

The Appellant is to pay the Second Respondent’s costs fixed in the sum of $6,408.00.

I allow six (6) months to pay.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.