Warnock and Armfield and Anor (SSAT Appeal)

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

WARNOCK & ARMFIELD & ANOR (SSAT APPEAL) [2013] FCCA 113

Catchwords:
CHILD SUPPORT – Appeal from decision of SSAT – question of law – whether SSAT failed to properly apply s.117(7B) – no issue raised before the SSAT of a failure to appropriately exercise earning capacity at a relevant time – asserted failure to consider hardship to appellant mother – SSAT explicitly addressing hardship – asserted failure to apply equitable doctrine of clean hands – SSAT addressing relevant facts – no error on question of law established – appeal dismissed.

Legislation:

Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988, ss.103S, 110B

Child Support (Assessment Act) 1989, ss.98C, 112, 117

Collector of Customs v Pozzolanic Enterprises Pty Ltd (1993) 43 FCR 280
Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Wu Shan Liang (1996) 185 CLR 259
PJ & Child Support Registrar [2007] FMCAfam 829, (2007) 38 Fam LR 31, (2007) FLC ¶98-035

Hacherl & Berrios [2010] FMCAfam 668

Applicant: MS WARNOCK

First Respondent: MR ARMFIELD

SecondRespondent: CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

File Number: HBC 674 of 2009

Judgment of: Judge Halligan

Hearing date: 22 April 2013

Date of Last Submission: 22 April 2013

Delivered at: Parramatta

Delivered on: 22 April 2013

REPRESENTATION

Solicitors for the Applicant: In Person

Solicitors for the First Respondent: No Appearance

Counsel for the Second Respondents: Mr Caplan

Solicitors for the Second Respondents: Program Litigation & Review Branch

ORDERS

1. The mother's Amended Notice of Appeal (Child Support) filed on

   
   

   14 June 2012 is dismissed.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under the pseudonym Warnock & Armfield & Anor (SSAT Appeal) is approved pursuant to s.121(9)(g) of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth).

FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF AUSTRALIA

AT PARRAMATTA

HBC 674 of 2009

MS WARNOCK

Applicant

And

MR ARMFIELD

First Respondent

CHILD SUPPORT REGISTRAR

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction

1. This is an appeal on a question of law against a decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (the SSAT), made on 4 October 2011. The decision under appeal had the effect of rejecting an application by the mother of a child to change an administrative assessment of child support for the child for the period 19 September 2006 to 27 June 2007 (the relevant period).

2. The mother is the appellant. The child’s father and the Child Support Registrar (the Registrar) are the first and second respondents respectively.

3. The mother conducted her case without legal representation. The mother relied on an amended Notice of Appeal and written submissions in support and written submissions in reply to those on behalf of the Registrar.  I heard supplementary oral submissions from the mother.

4. As just inferred, the Registrar relied on written submissions.  I did not need to hear oral submissions on behalf of the Registrar.

5. The father did not attend the hearing.  I was satisfied on the affidavit of the mother filed in court today that the father was given written notice of today’s hearing, and thus, that to proceed in his absence…