CS & TC v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice & Anor [2021] NSWDC 16

CS & TC v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice & Anor [2021] NSWDC 16

Leave was refused because the parents did not establish a significant change in any relevant circumstances since the 2014 Final Care Order. The matters relied on were overwhelmingly the same matters advanced and rejected in 2014, while the parents continued to deny the physical abuse and had not come to grips with the reasons for the original care order. The children were settled in stable care, wished to remain there, and the parents had no arguable case for rescission or variation. The safety, welfare and well-being of the children pointed overwhelmingly to refusing leave.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal in Care Proceedings / Appeal From the Children's Court's Refusal of Leave to Apply to Rescind or Vary a Care Order
Outcome
Summons dismissed; leave to make an application for rescission or variation of the care order refused; Children's Court decision affirmed.
Legal Topics
['care Order' 'rescission or Variation of Care Orders' 'leave Under Section 90' 'significant Change in Relevant Circumstances' 'best Interests, Safety, Welfare and Well Being of Children']
['child Welfare' 'care and Protection' 'appeals'] ['care Order' 'rescission or Variation of Care Orders' 'leave Under Section 90' 'significant Change in Relevant Circumstances' 'best Interests, Safety, Welfare and Well Being of Children']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal in Care Proceedings / Appeal From the Children's Court's Refusal of Leave to Apply to Rescind or Vary a Care Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the refusal of leave under section 90 of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 was appellable as of right under section 91.' 'Whether there had been a significant change in any relevant circumstances since the 2014 Final Care Order so as to enliven the discretion to grant leave under section 90(2).' 'Whether the views of the children, the stability of their current placement, and the other section 90(2B) and section 90(2C) considerations supported the grant of leave.' 'Whether the parents had an arguable case for rescission or variation of the care order if leave were granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the parents did not establish a significant change in any relevant circumstances since the 2014 Final Care Order. The matters relied on were overwhelmingly the same matters advanced and rejected in 2014, while the parents continued to deny the physical abuse and had not come to grips with the reasons for the original care order. The children were settled in stable care, wished to remain there, and the parents had no arguable case for rescission or variation. The safety, welfare and well-being of the children pointed overwhelmingly to refusing leave.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; leave to make an application for rescission or variation of the care order refused; Children's Court decision affirmed.

Orders

  • ['That the summons be dismissed;' 'That leave to make an application for rescission or variation of the care order be refused;' "That the decision of the Children's Court dated 10 September 2020 be affirmed."]