Tibbets and Cracroft (Child support) - [2024] AATA 4125

Tibbets and Cracroft (Child support) [2024] AATA 4125 (4 October 2024)

DIVISION:Social Services & Child Support Division
REVIEW NUMBER:  2024/MC028108
APPLICANT:  Mr Tibbets
OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar
Ms Cracroft

TRIBUNAL:Member K Hamilton
DECISION DATE: 04 October 2024
DECISION:

The decision under review is affirmed.

CATCHWORDS
CHILD SUPPORT – PERCENTAGE OF CARE – 17-year old living at home of friends and working – father’s occasional financial and emotional support – mother’s limited contact – decision under review affirmed

REASONS FOR DECISION

BACKGROUND

Mr Tibbets and Ms Cracroft are the parents of [the child], who turned 18 on 23 April 2024. Prior to 15 January 2024, Ms Cracroft was recorded for child support purposes as having 100% care and Mr Tibbets 0% care of [the child].
On 15 January 2024, Ms Cracroft advised Services Australia – Child Support (Child Support) that [the child] was no longer living with her and that she had 0% care of [the child].
On 20 January 2024, Child Support made a decision to reflect the care of [the child] as 100% to Mr Tibbets and 0% to Ms Cracroft from 15 January 2024.
Ms Cracroft objected to that decision on 12 February 2024. On 26 May 2024, a Child Support objections officer allowed her objection and made a decision to reflect the care of [the child] as 0% to Ms Cracroft and 0% to Mr Tibbets from 15 January 2024.
Mr Tibbets then applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) on 21 June 2024 for further review.
I heard the matter on 4 October 2024. Mr Tibbets and Ms Cracroft both participated in the hearing by telephone and gave evidence under affirmation.
The Tribunal had regard to the following documents:
·Relevant documents provided by Child Support pursuant to sections 37 and 38AA of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, numbered 1–84;
·Documents submitted by Mr Tibbets, numbered by the Tribunal as pages A1–A2;
·Documents submitted by Ms Cracroft, numbered by the Tribunal as pages B1–B5.

ISSUES

The legislative provisions relevant to this application are contained in the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (the Act).
If a person applies for an administrative assessment of child support and has had, or is likely to have, a pattern of care for the child during the relevant care period, then the decision-maker must determine that parent’s percentage of care for the child during the care period: section 50 of the Act.
If a responsible person who was to have at least regular care of a child during a care period (at least 14% care) under a care determination made under section 50 had no care of the child, or a pattern of care that was less than regular care of the child, the care determination must be revoked and a new determination made: section 54G in Division 4, Subdivision C of the Act. This section can only apply, however, where the other parent’s care percentage has been determined under section 50 of the Act.
A responsible person’s existing…

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.

Continue reading Tibbets and Cracroft (Child support)

Details

AGLC: Tibbets and Cracroft (Child support) [2024] AATA 4125
Case: [2024] AATA 4125
Decision Date: 4 October 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the child support assessment for a 17-year-old child. The dispute concerned the percentage of care attributed to each parent, specifically whether the father should be considered to have a greater percentage of care than that assessed by the Child Support Registrar. The child had been living with friends and was employed, while the father provided occasional financial and emotional support, and the mother had limited contact with the child.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Registrar's decision regarding the percentage of care was correct. This involved assessing whether the factual circumstances met the criteria for attributing a particular percentage of care under the relevant child support legislation, particularly in light of the child's age and independent living arrangements.

Member K Hamilton affirmed the Registrar's decision, finding that the father did not have a greater percentage of care. The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the practical realities of the child's living situation and the nature of the support provided by the father. The occasional nature of the father's financial and emotional contributions, coupled with the child's independent living and employment, meant that the threshold for attributing a higher percentage of care to the father was not met. The Tribunal applied the principles of the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth) concerning the assessment of care percentages.

Orders