Skip to content

Child Support Assessments and the Duty to Maintain the Child

For separated parents, the need to contact the Child Support Agency (CSA) regarding child maintenance payments is inevitable if you cannot reach an agreement between each other. The CSA is the administrative body that assists in making assessments of child maintenance payments on behalf of parents. The parents may contest these assessments by requesting for a departure order at the CSA. There are also further review processes available through the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, the Family Court, or the Federal Magistrates Court. This article will explain the legislative framework surrounding departure orders as contained in the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (‘the Act’) and the duty to maintain the child.

Section 117 of the Act

This section of the Act sets out the test that an administrative body or court will use to decide whether a departure order is necessary.

Firstly, the Act states that a departure order is only possible in “special circumstances”.

Secondly, the Act also requires that the child maintenance assessment has led to an inequitable level of financial support from the parent who is making the child maintenance payments. This inequity can be due to the “income, property and financial resources” of either parent.

For example, inequity could arise because the parent who receives child maintenance payments has not declared a significant pay rise from their employer.

Income, Property and Financial Resources

In determining whether a “special circumstance” has arisen, the Act specifically disregards the “income, property and financial resources” of persons who do not have a duty to maintain the child.

The courts have discussed this issue in the following cases:

SBT & CMT [2005] FMCAfam257 

The court needed to decide whether payments from a mother’s parents towards her existing loan would be considered a financial resource and/or income.

The court stated that the mother’s parents had no liability to support the mother’s children, emphasising that third parties (such as grandparents) have no legal duty to maintain the child.

Babbit & Babbit [2011] FamCAFC 151

The father responsible for making child maintenance payments stated that the court should not take into account his new partner’s financial resources.

The court decided that it will not take into account the income, property and financial resource of a person who does not have a duty to maintain the child. These individuals included partners and step-partners.

However, the court disagreed with the father in the matter and considered the new partner’s financial resources. This disagreement was because the new partner was, in essence, holding the financial resources in trust for the father’s benefit.

Who has the Duty to Maintain the Child?

The two cases above indicate the court’s general reluctance to require other parties, including grandparents and step-parents to have a duty to maintain the child – the duty to maintain the child should lie with the parents. It is important to note that special circumstances do exist, and legal advice should be obtained if you or the other parent are involved with departure order proceedings either at the CSA or the courts.

Please note that LegalVision is a commercial law firm and cannot assist with family law matters.

Register for our free webinars

ACCC Merger Reforms: Key Takeaways for Executives and Legal Counsel

Online
Understand how the ACCC’s merger reforms impact your legal strategy. Register for our free webinar.
Register Now

Ask an Employment Lawyer: Contracts, Performance and Navigating Dismissals

Online
Ask an employment lawyer your contract, performance and dismissal questions in our free webinar. Register today.
Register Now

Stop Chasing Unpaid Invoices: Payment Terms That Actually Work

Online
Stop chasing late payments with stronger terms and protections. Register for our free webinar.
Register Now

Managing Psychosocial Risks: Employer and Legal Counsel Responsibilities

Online
Protect your business by managing workplace psychosocial risks. Register for our free webinar.
Register Now
See more webinars >
Kristine Biason

Kristine Biason

Practice Leader | View profile

Kristine is a Practice Leader in LegalVision’s Commercial Contracts team. She drafts and negotiates commercial contracts, in particular, supply, distribution and manufacturing agreements used internationally. She also assists clients with their information technology agreements, often aiding clients on their business journey by determining the relevant agreements needed for their business, whether that be a SaaS agreement, reseller agreement or a managed services agreement. She has previously worked in the Franchising team and has provided clients with advice on setting up franchises and purchasing franchises.

Qualifications: Bachelor of Laws, Graduate Diploma of Legal Practice, Bachelor of Media, Macquarie University.

Read all articles by Kristine

About LegalVision

LegalVision is an innovative commercial law firm that provides businesses with affordable, unlimited and ongoing legal assistance through our membership. We operate in Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand.

Learn more

We’re an award-winning law firm

  • Award

    2025 Future of Legal Services Innovation Finalist - Legal Innovation Awards

  • Award

    2025 Employer of Choice - Australasian Lawyer

  • Award

    2024 Law Company of the Year Finalist - The Lawyer Awards

  • Award

    2024 Law Firm of the Year Finalist - Modern Law Private Client Awards

  • Award

    2022 Law Firm of the Year - Australasian Law Awards