Szabo and Szabo (Child support)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Szabo to the Social Services and Child Support Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AATA) for a review of a decision made by Services Australia – Child Support (the Department). The Department had determined that the care of [Child 1] was 100% with Mr Szabo from 5 November 2018, and had disallowed Ms Szabo's objection to this decision. The review focused on whether the care percentages used in the child support assessment should be revoked and, if so, from what date new percentages should apply, and whether an interim period should be applied.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the pattern of care for [Child 1] had changed, necessitating the revocation of existing care percentages. It also needed to establish the correct care percentages and the date from which they should be effective, and consider whether an interim period should apply to maintain the previous percentages for a defined duration. The relevant law was found in the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989*, which outlines the process for determining care percentages based on the likely pattern of care and provides for the revocation of existing determinations if the actual care no longer corresponds with the assessed percentages and a new pattern has emerged.

The Tribunal found that care was proceeding in accordance with court orders until 5 November 2018. While Ms Szabo missed a scheduled care period on 16 November 2018 due to an agreement for [Child 1] to attend an event with Mr Szabo, this was not considered a change in the overall care arrangement. However, a change in care occurred on 30 November 2018 when [Child 1] refused to go with Ms Szabo. The Tribunal determined that Ms Szabo took reasonable action to have the care arrangements complied with by lodging an initiating application for parenting orders on 8 January 2019, which included a request for a recovery order. This action triggered an interim period, as defined by the Act, which would continue the previous care percentages. The Tribunal concluded that the normal pattern of care resumed on 15 February 2019, marking the end of the interim period.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Department's decision and substituted its own. It found that there was no change of care on 5 November 2018. While a change of care occurred on 30 November 2018, an interim period applied until 15 February 2019, meaning the care percentages remained unchanged during this period. The Tribunal noted that subsequent changes to care arrangements after 15 February 2019 were not before it for determination.