Sadr and Bartoli (Child support) - [2020] AATA 2043

Sadr and Bartoli (Child support) [2020] AATA 2043 (7 May 2020)

DIVISION:Social Services & Child Support Division
REVIEW NUMBER:  2020/MC018646
APPLICANT:  Mr Sadr
OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar
Ms Bartoli

TRIBUNAL:Member J Longo
DECISION DATE: 7 May 2020
DECISION:

The tribunal sets aside the decision under review and, in substitution, decides that Mr Sadr’s child support income amount is taken to be $36,946 (annualised) for the period 15 July 2019 to 30 June 2020.

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – particulars of the administrative assessment – estimate of income – whether the estimate should have been refused – estimate of income accepted – 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 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

Mr Sadr and Ms Bartoli are the parents of [Child 1], [Child 2] and [Child 3]. Mr Sadr is the parent liable to pay child support.
On 15 July 2019, Mr Sadr made an election to lodge an estimate of his income for the period 15 July 2019 to 30 June 2020 of $37,130.78 annualised income. On 15 July 2019, the Department of Human Services – Child Support (the Department) accepted Mr Sadr’s estimate of income of $36,946 (annualised) for the period 15 July 2019 to 30 June 2020.
On 23 September 2019, Ms Bartoli objected to the estimate of income. An extension of time for the objection was granted on 17 October 2019. On 13 March 2020, the Department allowed the objection to Mr Sadr’s estimate of income and refused to accept his estimate of income on 15 July 2019.
On 16 March 2020, Mr Sadr lodged an application with the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the tribunal) for a review of the decision. The hearing took place on 7 May 2020. Mr Sadr and Ms Bartoli spoke to the tribunal via conference telephone and gave sworn evidence. In making its decision, the tribunal took into consideration documents (numbered 1 to 174) provided by the Department and provided to Mr Sadr and Ms Bartoli.

CONSIDERATION

The law that applies in this case is the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (the Assessment Act) and the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (the Registration Act). The rate of child support payable by a liable parent is usually based on an administrative assessment under Part 5 of the Assessment Act. This requires the application of a statutory formula which takes into account factors such as the number of children, the level of care provided and the child support income amount of each parent.
Subdivision C of Division 7 of Part 5 of the Assessment Act enables a person to elect that an estimate of their adjusted taxable income is used either before the income year commences or during the income year…

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 Sadr and Bartoli (Child support) 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: [2020] AATA 2043
Decision Date: 7 May 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of *Sadr and Bartoli* concerned a dispute regarding a child support administrative assessment. The applicant, Mr Sadr, sought to challenge the estimate of his income made by the Registrar of the Child Support Agency. The matter came before the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the Registrar had erred in accepting the estimate of Mr Sadr's income for the purposes of the child support assessment. Specifically, the Court was required to determine if the estimate was reasonable in the circumstances and if it should have been refused.

Justice Longo M found that the Registrar had not erred in accepting the estimate of Mr Sadr's income. The Court applied the principles governing the making of estimates under the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988*, which allow for an estimate to be made where a liable parent fails to provide sufficient information about their income. The Court was satisfied that the information available to the Registrar at the time supported the estimate made. Consequently, the Court set aside the decision under review and substituted its own decision, upholding the Registrar's estimate of income.

Orders