Peverett and Chriss (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal by the father, Peverett, against a decision of the Child Support Registrar concerning the percentage of care for the parties' child. The Registrar had made a determination that the father had care of the child for 35% of the time, which resulted in no child support being payable by the father. The father sought to have this percentage of care determination reviewed, arguing that there had been a change to the likely pattern of care and that his percentage of care should be higher.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Registrar's decision to make a percentage of care determination was affected by error. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the Registrar had correctly applied the relevant provisions of the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988* (Cth) when assessing the likely pattern of care and determining the father's percentage of care. The court also had to determine if the Registrar had erred in failing to revoke existing percentage of care determinations and make new ones.

The court found that the Registrar had erred in their assessment of the likely pattern of care. The Registrar had failed to adequately consider evidence presented by the father regarding the actual and intended future care arrangements for the child. The court applied the principles of administrative law, emphasizing that a decision-maker must consider all relevant evidence and make findings of fact based on that evidence. The court determined that the existing percentage of care determinations were no longer reflective of the likely pattern of care and that new determinations were necessary.

The court set aside the Registrar's decision and substituted its own determination. The court found that the father had care of the child for 65% of the time, and consequently, the mother was ordered to pay child support to the father.