Ritchie and Ritchie and Anor (SSAT Appeal)

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

RITCHIE & RITCHIE & ANOR (SSAT APPEAL) [2014] FCCA 1095

Catchwords:
CHILD SUPPORT – Appeal – SSAT decision – decision set aside.

Legislation:

Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989

Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988

Applicant: MR RITCHIE

First Respondent: MS RITCHIE

Second Respondent: CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

File Number: MLC 13295 of 2007

Judgment of: Judge Coates

Hearing date: 8 November 2013

Date of Last Submission: 8 November 2013

Delivered at: Brisbane

Delivered on: 30 May 2014

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: Self represented

Solicitors for the Respondents:

Solicitors for the Second Respondent:

Self represented

Department of Human Services

ORDERS

1. That the Appeal from the Decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal filed on 5 September 2013 be allowed.

2. That the decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal made on 1 August 2013 be set aside.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Ritchie & Ritchie & Anor (SSAT Appeal) is approved pursuant to s.110X(4)(h) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT BRISBANE

MLC 13295 of 2007

MR RITCHIE

Applicant

And

MS RITCHIE

First Respondent

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 13 February 2009, Hartnett FM made orders regarding enforcement of child support arrears and late payments against the appellant, as well as orders by consent including a departure application in the appellant’s favour.

2. Subsequently on 1 August 2013 the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (the tribunal) made a decision on child support matters, taking into account the orders made by  Hartnett FM on 13 February 2009 (the 2009 orders).

3. The appeal before this court is against that tribunal decision.

4. Such appeals can only be made if a question of law is identified, there being no other grounds upon which an appeal can be allowed. Section s.110B of the Child Support (Regulation & Collection) Act 1988 states:

   “110B. A party to a proceeding before the SSAT under Part VIIA may appeal to a court having jurisdiction under this Act, on a question of law, from any decision of the SSAT in that proceeding.”

5. An appropriate explanation of such a question was given in Tasman & Tisdale [2010] FMCAfam 425, where Brown FM described what is sometimes called jurisdictional error:

   “85. In particular, I reiterate an administrative tribunal exceeds its powers and thus commits a jurisdictional error, which is correctable on appeal, in respect of a question of law, if it:

   ·    fails to construe properly the legislative provisions applicable;

   ·    identifies the wrong issues or asks itself the wrong questions;

   ·    ignores relevant material or relies on irrelevant material;

   ·    fails to accord procedural fairness to the party before it;

   ·    makes an erroneous finding of such a magnitude that it goes to the very jurisdiction which it purports to exercise rendering its decision perverse or unreasonable or otherwise offending logic.

   86. In summary, an appeal on a question of law:

   ·    is not a review on the merits…