AEL24 v Child Support Registrar

Note: Section 110X(4)(h) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth) makes it an offence, except in very limited circumstances, to publish proceedings that identify persons, associated persons, or witnesses involved in child support proceedings.

IT IS NOTED that publication of this judgment under a pseudonym is approved pursuant to s 110X(4)(h) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 (Cth

1. On 25 July 2025, orders were made for the Notice of Appeal filed by the respondent (AEL24) on 11 January 2024 to be dismissed.
2. Directions were made for the filing of submissions as to costs incurred by the applicant (Child Support Registrar).

1. The applicant is seeking a costs order against the respondent in the sum of $7,543.
2. The respondent is seeking that no costs be paid by the respondent to the applicant.
3. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the third respondent named in the Notice of Appeal) did not provide any written submissions as to the costs being sought by the applicant and informed the court that costs were not being sought by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal against the respondent.

1. The issues for determination are whether a cost order should be made against the respondent in favour of the applicant and if so the amount of costs payable to the applicant.

1. In considering this issue regard has been had to the written submissions of the parties and the relevant jurisdiction.
2. Findings of fact are made on the balance of probabilities having regard to the evidence and in what follows statements of fact constitute findings of fact.
3. Before considering the issues, regard must be had to the law.

1. Section 214(2) Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021 empowers the court to award costs in any proceedings brought before the court, except for those matters that are specifically excluded pursuant to section 214(1).
2. Whilst section 214(1) states that section 214(2) does not apply to child support proceedings, an appeal to the court from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, I find, is not a court proceeding commenced under any child support legislation, but a proceeding brought pursuant to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975.
3. Therefore, the court has jurisdiction to make a costs order in respect to appeal proceedings pursuant to section 214(2).

ARE COSTS PAYABLE BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE APPLICANT?

1. It is a well-established rule that in civil matters costs follow the event as discussed in Ritter v Godfrey [1918-19] All ER Rep 714 at 721 and Richards v Han (Costs) [2023] FCA 211 at [9].
2. It is further a well-established principle, as articulated by the Full Court in Paxton & Child Support Registrar (Cost) [2016] FAMCACF 158 at [29] that the Child Support Registrar:

Funded... by the public purse, ought not to have to bear the costs of reasonably defending (their) position against an unreasonable attack

1. I find having considered the evidence in this matter that it is appropriate for a costs order to be made against the respondent in favour of the applicant as the respondent was wholly unsuccessful in the appeal and the respondent had been previously made aware by the applicant that in the event the respondent was unsuccessful in the appeal then costs would be sought.

WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF COSTS PAYABLE BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE APPLICANT?

1. The applicant is seeking fixed costs in the sum of $7,543 which is the scale amount as provided for in Schedule 2, Part 1 Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) (General Federal Law) Rules 2021.
2. The amount of costs or the method of calculation was not disputed by the respondent.
3. I find that this is an appropriate amount of costs and order that the respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $7,543 by way of costs thrown away in respect to the respondent's failed appeal.
4. As the respondent in his written submissions addressed the issues of financial hardship then the respondent has been given three months in which to pay the costs.

I certify that the preceding nineteen (19) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of Judge L.Turner.