Stamos and Stamos (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Family Court of Australia regarding a child support assessment. The parties, referred to as Stamos and Stamos, disputed whether a payment made by the father for school fees constituted a "prescribed payment" under the *Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988* (Cth) that could be credited against his child support liability. The decision was made by Member P Jensen.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the payment made by the father for his child's school fees qualified as a "prescribed payment" as defined by the Act, thereby entitling him to a reduction in his assessed child support obligations. This required an interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Act concerning payments that could be offset against child support.

Member Jensen reasoned that for a payment to be considered a "prescribed payment" under the Act, it must meet specific criteria outlined in the legislation. The court found that the payment for school fees, while a significant contribution to the child's welfare, did not satisfy these criteria. Consequently, the payment could not be credited against the father's child support liability. The decision under review, which refused to recognise the school fee payment as a prescribed payment, was affirmed.