Seven and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Seven against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) regarding the percentage of care he provided for his son, T, for the purposes of Family Tax Benefit (FTB). The dispute centred on the period between 1 December 2014 and 9 June 2015, during which both Mr Seven and T's mother, Ms Ciftci, claimed to have had sole care of T. The AAT had previously determined that T was in Ms Ciftci's care for this period and in Mr Seven's care from 10 June 2015 to 22 February 2016.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine the correct percentage of care each parent provided for T during the disputed period, specifically from 1 December 2014 to 9 June 2015. This determination was crucial for establishing FTB entitlements. The Tribunal was required to assess the evidence presented by both Mr Seven and Ms Ciftci regarding T's living arrangements and care arrangements, particularly in light of T's age and increasing independence.

The Tribunal found that the evidence presented by both parties was vague and lacked sufficient corroboration to establish a change in care arrangements from the AAT's previous decision. While acknowledging T's knee surgery and recuperation at his father's home, and Mr Seven's absence overseas during a portion of the period, the Tribunal concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding of a different care percentage than that determined by the AAT. The Tribunal noted the inherent difficulty in precisely gauging care percentages for children nearing adulthood who naturally exercise more independence in choosing where they stay. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the AAT's decision.