Whitworth and Doran (Child support)

This matter concerned an application by the father, Mr Whitworth, for a departure from the child support assessment made under the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth) in relation to his two children, who reside with the mother, Ms Doran. The father sought to have his child support liability reduced, arguing that his current income was significantly lower than that used in the assessment and that he had incurred substantial debts.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the father had established, on the balance of probabilities, that the assessment of his child support liability was an 'unjust and unreasonable' outcome in his particular circumstances. This required the court to consider the specific grounds for departure outlined in section 117 of the *Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989* (Cth), namely whether the father's 'income, earnings or financial resources' were significantly different from those used in the assessment, and whether he had incurred 'necessary expenses' that were not taken into account.

The court considered the father's evidence regarding his reduced income and incurred debts. However, it found that the father had not provided sufficient evidence to satisfy the court that his current income was significantly different from that used in the assessment, nor that the debts he claimed were necessary expenses. The court applied the principles established in case law regarding the onus of proof in departure applications, emphasizing the need for clear and cogent evidence to displace the statutory assessment.

Ultimately, the court found that the father had failed to discharge the onus of proof required to establish that the child support assessment was unjust and unreasonable. Accordingly, the application for a departure from the assessment was dismissed.