Xander and Haage (Child support) - [2020] AATA 3667

Xander and Haage (Child support) [2020] AATA 3667 (18 June 2020)

DIVISION:Social Services & Child Support Division
REVIEW NUMBER:  2020/SC018391
APPLICANT:  Ms Xander
OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar
Mr Haage

TRIBUNAL:Member K Dordevic
DECISION DATE: 18 June 2020
DECISION:

The tribunal sets aside the decision under review and, in substitution, decides that:

·      for the period 1 January 2019 until a terminating event occurs in respect of the child, Mr Haage’s annual rate of child support is varied to $26,000 per annum; and
·      from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2019 Mr Haage’s annual rate of child support is increased by $28,000; and
·      from 1 January 2020 until a terminating evident occurs in relation to the child, Mr Haage’s annual rate of child support is increased by $30,000 per annum.

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – departure determination – costs of education - manner expected by both parents - cost of maintaining the children are significantly affected – financial resources of both parents – no full and frank disclosure of financial information by the liable parent - decision under review set aside and substituted

Names used in all published decisions are pseudonyms. Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been removed from this decision and replaced with generic information so as not to identify involved individuals as required by subsections 16(2AB)-16(2AC) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

REASONS FOR DECISION

BACKGROUND

The Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (the Act) provides for an administrative assessment of the child support payable. It uses a formula which contains variables such as the parents’ adjusted taxable incomes and their percentages of care of the children. The Act also provides for a departure from the administrative assessment in certain circumstances.
The mother and the father are the parents of one child, born [in] 2007. The case was registered with the Department of Human Services – Child Support on 28 September 2017 and has been collectable since that date. The child is recorded as being in the mother’s sole care.
The mother lodged a departure application on 7 February 2019. On 14 June 2019 a senior case officer determined that from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2021 the father’s adjusted taxable income is varied to $255,800, the mother’s adjusted taxable income is varied to $57,058 and that the father’s annual rate of child support shall be increased by $28,630.
The father’s objection, lodged on 8 July 2019, was partly allowed on 17 September 2019. The objection officer determined:
· The father’s adjusted taxable income is varied to:
§ $255,800 per annum during the period 1 January 2019 to 7 July 2019; and
§ $146,000 per annum during the period 8 July 2019 to 31 December 2020;
· The mother’s adjusted taxable income is varied to:
§ $57,058 per annum during the period 1 January 2019 to 7 July 2019;
§ $67,000 during the period 8 July 2019 to 31 December 2019; and
§ $30,000 during the period 1 January…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Xander and Haage (Child support)

Details

AGLC: Xander and Haage (Child support) [2020] AATA 3667
Case: [2020] AATA 3667
Decision Date: 18 June 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an appeal to the Full Court of the Family Court of Australia regarding a departure determination made by a Child Support Registrar. The appeal was brought by the liable parent, Xander, against the respondent, Haage, concerning the costs of their children's education.

The primary legal issues before the Full Court were whether the Registrar erred in making a departure determination to increase the liable parent's child support assessment, and whether the Registrar had sufficient regard to the relevant legislative criteria. Specifically, the court considered whether the costs of the children's education were a manner that was, or would have been, expected by both parents, and whether these costs significantly affected the costs of maintaining the children. The court also examined whether the financial resources of both parents were adequately considered, and whether the liable parent had failed to make full and frank disclosure of their financial information.

The Full Court found that the Registrar had erred in her assessment. While acknowledging that the costs of education could be a relevant factor, the court determined that the Registrar had not adequately considered the "manner expected by both parents" in relation to these costs. Furthermore, the court found that the Registrar had not properly assessed the impact of these educational costs on the overall cost of maintaining the children. Crucially, the court noted a lack of full and frank financial disclosure by the liable parent, which undermined the Registrar's ability to make a fully informed decision.

Consequently, the Full Court set aside the Registrar's departure determination and substituted its own decision.

Orders