Wallance and Child Support Registrar (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant, Wallance, against a decision of the Child Support Registrar to refuse an extension of time to lodge an objection. The dispute centred on the Registrar's refusal to grant this extension, which prevented Wallance from pursuing a substantive application concerning the use of provisional income in a child support assessment after the actual taxable income had been ascertained. The decision under review was made by a Senior Member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Registrar had erred in refusing to grant an extension of time for Wallance to lodge an objection to a child support assessment. This required the Tribunal to consider whether Wallance had provided a reasonable explanation for the significant delay in lodging the objection and whether the substantive grounds of the objection, relating to the calculation of child support based on provisional income when actual income was known, had sufficient merit to warrant an extension.

The Tribunal affirmed the Registrar's decision, finding that Wallance had failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the substantial delay in lodging the objection. While acknowledging that the substantive application concerning the use of provisional income might have merit, the Tribunal concluded that the lack of a satisfactory explanation for the delay was determinative. The principles applied focused on the requirements for granting an extension of time, emphasising the need for a reasonable explanation for the delay and the potential merit of the underlying objection.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Child Support Registrar.