Application for orders — departure from formula assessment — "just and equitable" — "otherwise proper" — Child Support Act 1991, ss 4, 104, 105, 106 & 232 — Johnson v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2002] 2 NZLR 816, (2002) 22 FRNZ 244, [2002] NZFLR 648 (HC) — Duncan v Videan (1997) 15 FRNZ 384 (HC) — Rowlands v Rowlands & Commissioner of Inland Revenue FC New Plymouth FP 043/344/04, 30 June 2004. The parties had three children together, all of whom were in the day-to-day care of their mother, the respondent. The applicant father's income had fallen to one eighth of his previous earnings due to a workplace accident and subsequent health diagnoses, and meant that he now had to work reduced hours. The applicant subsequently sought a departure from the formula-assessed child support liability for a previous financial year, on the grounds that it was unjust and inequitable because of his income, financial resources and earning capacity. The respondent submitted that she had received minimal child-support payments from the respondent, that the formula assessments were fair because the applicant was often paid in cash, and that the respondent's health diagnoses were untruthful. The Judge noted that the application before the Court was a second review and not an appeal, meaning that the Court was authorised to depart from the Commissioner's decision and return to a formula assessment if appropriate. As a result of the time elapsed since the review officer's assessment, the Judge held that the matter could be considered afresh. The applicant's health problems and subsequent reduced income amounted to special circumstances under s 105 of the Child Support Act, satisfying the grounds for a departure order. The respondent failed to provide any financial information, so no findings could be made as to the extent that the children's needs affected her financial situation. The Judge was satisfied that it was just and equitable to make a departure order. Such an order was made, and the child support payable by the applicant for previous financial years was adjusted to $76.50 per month. The applicant sought costs against the Commissioner on the basis that his applications for departure orders were successful. The Judge declined the award of costs, deciding that the earlier reviews were unsuccessful because of a lack of financial information provided by the applicant. Judgment Date: 22 February 2022 * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *