Child Benefit. Keywords:Review of Child benefit entitlement—whether child ‘normally resident’ with the claimant—error of fact and law—fair procedures—section 318—appeal allowed.

Title of Payment: Child Benefit

Case Summary:

The Appellant was in receipt of Child Benefit in respect of her child. In September 2006, the Department of Social and Family Affairs informed the Appellant that she should not have been paid Child Benefit from May 2005 as Child Benefit was payable to the person with whom a qualified child “normally resides”. From April 2005 until March 2006, the child lived with her aunt. From March 2006 until August 2006, the child lived with her father.

The Appeals Officer disallowed the Appeal on the grounds that the child was not resident with the Appellant during the period April 2005 – August 2006.

The Appellant requested that the Chief Appeals Officer review the decision of the Appeals Officer’s on a point of law. The Chief Appeals Officer held that the Appellant was entitled to be paid child benefit during the period May 2005 – August 2006 as the child could be regarded as “normally resident” with the Appellant under the relevant statutory provisions. The Appeal was allowed. 

Download this case

 

Friday, 05 October 2007

Title of Payment: Child Benefit

Case Summary:

The Appellant was in receipt of Child Benefit in respect of her child. In September 2006, the Department of Social and Family Affairs informed the Appellant that she should not have been paid Child Benefit from May 2005 as Child Benefit was payable to the person with whom a qualified child “normally resides”. From April 2005 until March 2006, the child lived with her aunt. From March 2006 until August 2006, the child lived with her father.

The Appeals Officer disallowed the Appeal on the grounds that the child was not resident with the Appellant during the period April 2005 – August 2006.

The Appellant requested that the Chief Appeals Officer review the decision of the Appeals Officer’s on a point of law. The Chief Appeals Officer held that the Appellant was entitled to be paid child benefit during the period May 2005 – August 2006 as the child could be regarded as “normally resident” with the Appellant under the relevant statutory provisions. The Appeal was allowed. 

Download this case