Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Double dipping

S75(2) v child support

Hi all,

The Federal Magistrate hearing my property settlement awarded an additional 35% of our property to my ex-wife because of Section 75 (2) factors, namely 1) diaparite incomes (mine is higher); and 2) my ex-wife has primary care of the children.

Is not this additional property settlement amount relating to the care of the children effectively capitalised child support?

Dos anyone have experience or guidance in this matter?

Thanks,

Paul G

A person who can't pay gets another person who can't pay to guarantee that he can pay. Like a person with two wooden legs getting another person with two wooden legs to guarantee that he has got two natural legs. It don't make either of them able to do a walking-match. Charles Dickens
PaulG said
The Federal Magistrate hearing my property settlement awarded an additional 35% of our property to my ex-wife because of Section 75 (2) factors, namely 1) diaparite incomes (mine is higher); and 2) my ex-wife has primary care of the children.
That's a significant 75(2) consideration. Without reading the judgement (is it published?) one would be looking to see if there were not other factors including 75(2)(o) mentioned.

There are many considerations which might include the age of children, credibility, even abuse, non-disclosure and any of the (a) to (p) sections of 75(2). Did you self represent? Which sections specifically were mentioned in the judgement? Are you looking to appeal?

CSA in my observation is futuristic as compared to 75(2) (needs vased) which is to perhaps establish the children and their primary carer in an environment consistent with their previous experiences. The stage three consideration under 79(4) ought not to involve double dipping. Judges aren't perfect, they are sometimes corrected by the Full Court.

CSA is under a totally different Act. It's intent is possibly to gaurantee that a parent does not avoid responsibilities and expect the Commonwealth to pick up the slack.

What is done for you, let it be done, what you must do, be sure you do it, as the wise person does today that what the fool will do in three days - Buddha
Hi Verdad,

The judgement is not published. And the judge did not articulate comments specfically against any sub-paragraph of the S75(2). His statement in the reasons for judgement is exactly:

"The two primary issues in relation to my findings concerning s.75(2) are the disparity in income between the husband and the wife, and secondly, the fact that the wife has the primary care of the two young children."

If there were others reasons whch may had influenced the judges' decisison, he did not state them in his reasons.

I had initially lodged an appeal. But later withdrew it. I had consulted my lawyer and sought a second opinion from another barrister and both advised that I had very good grounds for the appeal. I withdrew because I was missing out on a lot of opportunities in my life: career, love, further education, and most importantly quality time with my children. There is a massive personal opportunity cost in taking matters through the family court system. So I had decided to end this episode of my life and move on. Afterall, if the judge was correct in saying that I was talented and had a good ability to earn substantial money, then without the distractions of the family court now is my time to acheive more.

But alasit's not over. Know I have CSA and SSAT matters to deal with. I guess you can not unscarmble the egg of marriage.

What do you mean by stage three considerations of 79(4)?

I do understand that they are different acts, but there appears to be common consideartions between them. Is there a precidence amongst the acts? Can a previous decision or judgement of a common consideration, eg. award of money for the purposes of caring for the children,take precedence?

Thanks

Moderator Note
There is no need to use large fonts, they are equivalent to shouting

A person who can't pay gets another person who can't pay to guarantee that he can pay. Like a person with two wooden legs getting another person with two wooden legs to guarantee that he has got two natural legs. It don't make either of them able to do a walking-match. Charles Dickens
If there were others reasons whch may had influenced the judges' decisison, he did not state them in his reasons.
This does not stand to reason. It is not for a judge/magistrate to arrive at a proposition that isnot argument based, balanced on probabilities, and, that these arguments are founded on established facts. Judges generally do not hand down judgements that could see their capacities diminished in the reasonings of their peers.


I supported a person on $300K a year and the income disparity was significant. The75(2) facors which were assessed by two of the more senior counsel in Sydney Registry was around 10%. Are your earnings more diverse?

I had initially lodged an appeal. But later withdrew it.
What were the grounds you sought to base your appeal on?


Afterall, if the judge was correct in saying that I was talented and had a good ability to earn substantial money, then without the distractions of the family court now is my time to acheive more.
This might have been titillation?


What do you mean by stage three considerations of 79(4)?
Were you represented? If so, did you ask questions of those in your employ?


Moderator Note
There is no need to use large fonts, they are equivalent to shouting

What is done for you, let it be done, what you must do, be sure you do it, as the wise person does today that what the fool will do in three days - Buddha
Verdad,

I live in Sydney, but the case was heard in Brisbane where my ex-wife lives.

The final hearing on property matters occurred 28 May 2009.

I appreciate you taking an interest in my case. Indeed if you would like to make personal contact I can share further information with you.

Last edit: by PaulG


A person who can't pay gets another person who can't pay to guarantee that he can pay. Like a person with two wooden legs getting another person with two wooden legs to guarantee that he has got two natural legs. It don't make either of them able to do a walking-match. Charles Dickens
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets