Slattery and Deegan

[2017] FCCA 3036

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SLATTERY & DEEGAN [2017] FCCA 3036

Catchwords:
CHILD SUPPORT – Setting aside of a binding child support agreement.

Legislation:

Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, ss.136A, 136(1)(a), 136(2)(d)

Family Law Act 1975, s.79A(1)(d)

Cases cited:

Baker v The Queen [2004] 223 CLR 513

Balzano & Balzano [2010] FamCAFC 11

Gallup & Gallup (2009) FLC 839

Garnett & Director-General, Department of Community Services Child Safety and Disability Services & Anor [2013] FamCAFC 28

Gyselman & Gyselman (1992) FLC 92-279

Hardman & Hardman [2003] FamCA 1057

Keane & Keane and Ors [2013] FamCA 332

Oriolo& Oriolo (1985) FLC 91-653
Scott & Scott (1994) 17 FLR 420-444
Simpson & Hamlin (1984) FLC 91-576
Telama & Telama [2016] FCCA 2375
Telama & Telama (No. 2) [2017] FamCAFC 194
Venson & Venson (No. 2) [2010] FamCA 963

Applicant: MR SLATTERY

Respondent: MS DEEGAN

File Number: SYC 4570 of 2016

Judgment of: Judge Henderson

Hearing date: 17 October 2017

Date of Last Submission: 17 October 2017

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 6 December 2017

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant: Applicant in Person

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr McCulloch

Solicitors for the Respondent: Legal Aid NSW Parramatta Family Law

ORDERS

1. The Binding Child support agreement entered into between the parties on 25 May 2010 be and is set aside as and from 2 July 2016.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Slattery & Deegan is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYC 4570 of 2016

MR SLATTERY

Applicant

And

MS DEEGAN

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application by Mr Slattery to set aside a Binding Child Support Agreement (the agreement) entered into by the parties on 25 May 2010. That application is opposed by the mother.

2. The agreement relates to the parties’ child, X, born (omitted) 2002. He is currently 15 years of age. There is some issue as to whether he is:

   a)Continuing to attend school at the present time; and/or

   b)Living with his mother or his father.

3. The material I read was as follows:

   a)For the father:

   i)Affidavits of 21 July 2016, 16 February 2017 17 October 2017. The latest affidavit related to the father’s position regarding the current and changed circumstances of his child’s living and schooling arrangements;

   ii)Financial statement of 16 February 2017;

   iii)I was referred to his financial statements of 21 July 2016 and 21 April 2010. The 2010 document was relevant to his financial position at the time the agreement was entered into; and

   iv)Initiating application filed 21 July 2016;

   b)For the mother:

   i)Affidavits of 1 March 2017 and 11 October 2017;

   ii)Financial statement of 3 March 2017; and

   iii)Response filed 3 March 2017.

4. Mr Slattery was self-represented. The mother was represented by Mr McCulloch, solicitor.

5. Only father was cross-examined.

6. Mr Slattery represented himself which placed him at a significant disadvantage in a difficult matter such as this as the test to satisfy the court to…