Thomas & Harry (SSAT Appeal)

Thomas appealed to the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT) against a decision made by the Australian Government Department of Human Services (the Respondent) regarding child support payments. Harry intervened in the appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal and the intervener’s application. Thomas and Harry appealed to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia.

The appeal concerned the interpretation of the word "income" for the purposes of the Social Security (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) and the Social Security (Child Support) (Administration) Regulations 1994 (Cth). The parties disagreed as to whether income included passive income, such as dividends from shares. The court considered whether the Tribunal had correctly interpreted the definition of income and whether it had applied the correct legal principles to the facts of the case.

The court held that the Tribunal had correctly interpreted the definition of income and applied the correct legal principles to the facts of the case. The court found that income included passive income such as dividends from shares. The court held that the Tribunal had not erred in its decision and dismissed the appeal. The intervener's application was also dismissed.