Sandridge and Zelly (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal by Sandridge against a decision of the Child Support Registrar concerning the percentage of care for the parties' child. The dispute arose from Sandridge's contention that a temporary deviation from the usual care arrangements, necessitated by the child's illness, should not alter the established percentage of care.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether a short and minor deviation from the usual pattern of care, specifically due to a child's illness, warranted a revocation of an existing percentage of care determination. The Tribunal was required to consider the application of the 'common sense' and 'broad brush' approach in assessing care arrangements under the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988*.

Member S Letch determined that the Registrar's decision was based on an incorrect application of the law. The Tribunal reasoned that temporary disruptions to care, such as those caused by a child's illness, should not be treated as a fundamental change to the established pattern of care. Applying a common-sense, broad-brush approach, the Tribunal found that the deviation was minor and temporary, and therefore did not justify revoking the existing percentage of care. The decision under review was set aside.