1. Ms Semoff and Mr Hiard are the parents of [Children 1 and 2]. A child support case was registered with Services Australia - Child Support ("Child Support") from 29 March 2016. Ms Semoff was recorded as providing 86% care and Mr Hiard was recorded as providing 14% care for both children.
2. On 19 April 2024, Mr Hiard informed Child Support of a change in care. Child Support decided to record Ms Semoff as providing 0% care and Mr Hiard as providing 100% care for both children with effect from 15 April 2024. Ms Semoff objected to that decision. An objections officer disallowed the objection. Ms Semoff applied to the Tribunal for further review. I heard the matter on 21 March 2025. Ms Semoff and Mr Hiard gave sworn evidence via MS Teams.
3. Care decisions generally reflect the pattern of care that is actually being provided: Division 4 of Part 5 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 ("the Assessment Act"). There is no dispute that Mr Hiard started providing full-time care for both children from 15 April 2024. Child Support's decision reflected that undisputed fact.
4. Section 51 of the Assessment Act provides an exception to the general rule. If certain requirements are satisfied, the parents can be recorded as providing the care they should have provided pursuant to a "care arrangement" rather than the care they actually provided. One of the requirements of section 51 is that "a care arrangement applies in relation to the child": paragraph 51(1)(b) of the Assessment Act.
5. The term "care arrangement" is defined in section 5 of the Assessment Act and section 3 of the A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1999 ("the Family Assistance Act") as follows:

(a) a written agreement between the parents of the child, or between a parent of the child and another person who cares for the child, that relates to the care of the child; or

(b) a parenting plan for the child; or

(c) any of the following orders relating to the child:

(i) a family violence order within the meaning of section 4 of the Family Law Act 1975;

(ii) a parenting order within the meaning of section 64B of that Act;

(iii) a State child order registered in accordance with section 70D of that Act;

(iv) an overseas child order registered in accordance with section 70G of that Act.

1. Mr Hiard said the parents separated around November 2015. Ms Semoff said they separated in February 2016. The child support case started in March 2016. The parents attended mediation in respect of their care of the children. The parents were in separate rooms and they reached an agreement via a mediator who spoke to them separately. On 22 July 2016 the mediator provided both parents with a hand written document that reflected their agreement ("the Document"). It is unsigned. It is entitled "Temporary arrangement".
2. The facts raise two issues. The first issue is whether the Document is a written agreement. It is not signed and dated by the parents and so, on one view, it is merely a mediator's file note of the parents' oral agreement: see Chapter 2.2.4 of the Child Support Guide. There is obvious force in that view but it was ultimately not necessary to made on finding in respect of that matter.
3. The second issue, assuming for the moment that the Document is a written agreement, is whether it applied in relation to the children in April 2024. The Document describes a general pattern of care. There is no dispute that the parents continued to provide that general pattern of care until April 2024. It does not automatically follow that the Document continued to apply in April 2024. On one view, the Document applied for a finite period that expired prior to April 2024 and the parents elected to continue to provide the same pattern of care despite the expiration of the Document. The title of the Document, "Temporary arrangement", supports that view.
4. Mr Hiard said reaching the "Temporary arrangement" was part of the process of getting the children to understand their parents' separation and its consequences.
5. Ms Semoff submitted:

The agreed parenting plan is labelled "temporary", meaning that, that is what was agreed to at the time (in 2016), meaning that either one of us could re-apply for mediation again in the future to re negotiate [sic] the plan.

1. With respect, I consider it unlikely that the word "Temporary" was intended to convey that meaning. If the Document had simply been entitled "Arrangement", that would not have prevented either parent from subsequently seeking a different arrangement. Most parents realise that a care arrangement may need to change in the future, which is why parents rarely purport to enter into an irrevocable care arrangement. In my opinion, the decision to add the word "Temporary" was intended to convey a different meaning.
2. The Macquarie Dictionary relevantly defines "temporary" as:

lasting, existing, serving, or effective for a time only; not permanent: a temporary need.

1. Oxford Dictionaries relevantly define "temporary" as:

Lasting for only a limited period of time; not permanent: 'a temporary job'

1. Many parents reach informal oral agreements concerning the care of the children. The decision to reach a written agreement can have more serious consequences. It seems likely, and I find, that "Temporary" was added to the title of the Document to indicate that it was intended to bind the parents for a limited period of time; it was not intended to bind them (or apply in relation to the children) for a permanent or indefinite period of time. The Document does not specify its precise duration. However, I am satisfied that it expired years before April 2024. For that reason, the decision under review is correct and it is not necessary to make a finding as to whether the Document is a written agreement.