Wodefold and Gilliam (Child support)

This matter concerned an appeal by Wodefold against a decision of the Child Support Registrar concerning the percentage of care for the parties' child. The dispute arose from differing views on the proportion of time the child spent with each parent, with no formal agreement or court orders in place at the relevant time. Wodefold had not raised objections to the initial assessment of care percentages at the time they were made, and a significant period had elapsed since then. Furthermore, the appeal did not encompass a later change in the child's care arrangements.

The primary legal issue before the Member was whether the Child Support Registrar's decision regarding the percentage of care was correct, particularly in light of the passage of time and the absence of contemporaneous objections. The Member was required to consider the evidence presented and determine if the Registrar's assessment was justified, taking into account the inconsistencies in the dates provided by the parties and the fact that the current care arrangements were not the subject of the application.

The Member affirmed the decision of the Child Support Registrar. The reasoning focused on the lack of objection by Wodefold at the time the care percentages were initially determined and the significant passage of time since that determination. The Member found that the inconsistencies in dates and the fact that the later change of care was not part of the application meant that the original decision stood. The principle applied was that a party cannot belatedly challenge a decision regarding care percentages when they had the opportunity to object earlier and had not done so, especially when the circumstances had evolved.