Tan v Child Support Registrar - [2013] FCCA 123

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

TAN & TAN (SSAT APPEAL)
and
TAN v CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR & ANOR

[2013] FCCA 123

Catchwords:
CHILD SUPPORT – Appeal from SSAT – reconciliation of costs of raising children with Costs of Children Tables.
CHILD SUPPORT – Appeal from SSAT – whether issue estoppel applies to administrative decision of Child Support Registrar or SSAT.
CHILD SUPPORT – Appeal from SSAT – whether Child Support Registrar functus officio.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Judicial review – grounds of review – generally.

Legislation:
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977
Child Support Assessment Act 1989, ss.111, 112, Part 6A
Child Support Registration and Collection Act 1988
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900

Cases cited:
Administration of the Territory of Papua and New Guinea & Anor. v Daera Guba [1973] HCA 59; (1973) 130 CLR 353; (1973) 47 ALJR 621
Chamberlain v Deputy Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1988] HCA 21; (1988) 164 CLR 502
Carlson & Arcuff and Anor (SSAT Appeal) [2010] FMCAfam 677
Gelber & The Child Support Registrar and Anor (SSAT Appeal) [2012] FMCAfam 45
Howell v Falmouth Boat Construction Co Ltd [1951] AC 837; (1951) 2 All ER 278
Luten v Lessels [2002] HCA 13; (2002) 210 CLR 333; [2002] FLC ¶98-015; (2002) 187 ALR 529; (2002) 76 ALJR 635; (2002) 28 Fam LR 398; (2002) 23 Leg Rep 2; 49 ATR 471
Maritime Electric Co Ltd v General Dairies Ltd [1937] AC 610; (1937) 1 All ER 748
Tan & Tan and Anor [2011] FMCAfam 913

Applicant:

MR TAN

Respondent:

MS TAN

File Number:

MLC 4576 of 2009

Applicant:

MR TAN

First Respondent:

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

Second Respondent:

MS TAN

File Number:

MLG 963 of 2012

Judgment of:

Judge Riethmuller

Hearing date:

29 August 2012

Date of Last Submission:

29 August 2012

Delivered at:

Dandenong

Delivered on:

13 May 2013

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant:

The Applicant appearing in person.

Counsel for the First Respondent:

Mr McAloon of Counsel

Solicitors for the First Respondent:

Australian Government Solicitors

Counsel for the Second Respondent:

The Second Respondent appearing in person

ORDERS

The appeal with respect to SSAT appeal [1] be dismissed.
The appeal with respect to SSAT appeal [2] be dismissed.
The application for judicial review filed 15 June 2012 be dismissed.
There be no order as to costs.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Tan & Tan (SSAT Appeal) and Tan v Child Support Registrar & Anor is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT
OF AUSTRALIA
AT DANDENONG

MLC 4576 of 2009

MR TAN

Applicant

And

MS TAN

Respondent

MLG 963 of 2012

MR TAN

Applicant

And

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

First Respondent

MS TAN

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

The applicant has filed two notices of appeal with respect to decisions of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal, together with an originating application seeking judicial review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Tan v Child Support Registrar and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2013] FCCA 123
Decision Date: 13 May 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of *Tan v Child Support Registrar* concerned appeals from decisions of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) and an application for judicial review, heard by Judge Riethmuller. The central dispute revolved around the reconciliation of the costs of raising children with the Costs of Children Tables, and whether principles of issue estoppel or the doctrine of *functus officio* applied to decisions made by the Child Support Registrar or the SSAT.

The court was required to determine whether the SSAT had erred in its application of the Costs of Children Tables to the specific circumstances of the parties. Furthermore, the court had to consider whether the doctrine of issue estoppel prevented the Child Support Registrar or the SSAT from revisiting or making new decisions on matters previously determined. The court also had to assess whether the Child Support Registrar was *functus officio*, meaning their authority to act in relation to a particular matter had ceased.

Judge Riethmuller dismissed the appeals from the SSAT decisions and the application for judicial review. The reasoning likely involved a determination that the SSAT had correctly applied the relevant legislation and tables, and that the principles of issue estoppel and *functus officio* did not preclude the Registrar or SSAT from making the decisions under review in the circumstances presented. The court found no grounds for judicial review.

Consequently, the appeal with respect to SSAT appeal [1] was dismissed, as was the appeal with respect to SSAT appeal [2]. The application for judicial review filed on 15 June 2012 was also dismissed, and there were no orders as to costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The appeal with respect to SSAT appeal [1] be dismissed.

2. The appeal with respect to SSAT appeal [2] be dismissed.

3. The application for judicial review filed 15 June 2012 be dismissed.

4. There be no order as to costs.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.