Whetten and Conisbey (Child support)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the dispute between Whetten and Conisbey concerning the percentage of care for their child. The core of the disagreement revolved around whether there had been a change to the likely pattern of care, leading to the revocation of existing percentage of care determinations and the making of new ones. The Tribunal also addressed issues related to non-compliance with court orders and whether reasonable action had been taken, with an interim period being applied to the decision under review.

The legal issues before the AAT included determining whether a change in the likely pattern of care had occurred, necessitating a review of existing percentage of care determinations. Furthermore, the Tribunal was required to consider the date of effect provisions for these determinations, specifically whether special circumstances existed that prevented an objection from being lodged within the prescribed time. The AAT also had to assess whether special circumstances prevented a late application for review of a tribunal decision under subsection 95N(2) of the relevant legislation.

In its reasoning, the AAT found that the existing percentage of care determinations were no longer accurate due to a change in the likely pattern of care. It determined that reasonable action had been taken in response to non-compliance with court orders, and an interim period was therefore applicable. Regarding the late application for review, the Tribunal concluded that special circumstances did exist which prevented the objection from being lodged in time, leading to the setting aside of the previous decision and its substitution. However, in relation to a separate late application for review of a tribunal decision, the AAT found no special circumstances existed that prevented the application from being lodged within the required timeframe, and therefore declined to make a determination under subsection 95N(2).