Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Double dipping

S 75 (2) v child support

Hi all,

The Federal Magistrate hearing my propoerty 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 property settlement amount relating to the need to care for the children effectively capitalised child support? And therefore my current child support payments are no more than double dipping?

Dos anyone have experience in this matter?

Thanks,

Paul G

Aside and for the constitutional lawyers amongst you!!!

Section 75 (2) of the Family Law Act allows a judge to transfer wealth based on the parties ability to earn and their needs.

This reminds me of a famous quotation by Karl Marx, "From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need".

So when exactly, and who is responsible for embodying the cornerstone principle of communism into the laws governing our democratic state?

But more importantly, why have we accepted it?

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
There is an element of overlap between the two. However, s.75(2) and CSA payments are for different reasons. The reason the government can do this is that people let them - you have a vote.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas. 
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets