Secretary of the Department of Communities and Justice v Julian Minster [2020] NSWChC 10

Secretary of the Department of Communities and Justice v Julian Minster [2020] NSWChC 10

The Children's Court has an implied power in its parole jurisdiction under the Children (Detention Centres) Act 1987 to rescind a parole revocation because that power is necessary to avoid injustice to young people, to achieve the objects of the Act, and to further the relevant Children's Court legislation and principles prioritising rehabilitation of children. Exercising that implied power, the Court rescinded the previous revocation order so that the original parole order continued.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal; Youth Parole / Hearing in the Children's Court Parole Jurisdiction After Revocation of Parole
Outcome
Previous order for revocation rescinded; original parole order continues.
Legal Topics
["children's Court Parole Jurisdiction" 'implied Power to Rescind Parole Revocation' 'children (detention Centres) Act 1987']
['criminal Law' "children's Law" 'parole'] ["children's Court Parole Jurisdiction" 'implied Power to Rescind Parole Revocation' 'children (detention Centres) Act 1987']

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

Criminal; Youth Parole / Hearing in the Children's Court Parole Jurisdiction After Revocation of Parole

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Children's Court, in its parole jurisdiction under the Children (Detention Centres) Act 1987, has an implied power to rescind a revocation of parole." "Whether the previous order revoking the young person's parole should be rescinded so that the original parole order continues."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Children's Court has an implied power in its parole jurisdiction under the Children (Detention Centres) Act 1987 to rescind a parole revocation because that power is necessary to avoid injustice to young people, to achieve the objects of the Act, and to further the relevant Children's Court legislation and principles prioritising rehabilitation of children. Exercising that implied power, the Court rescinded the previous revocation order so that the original parole order continued.

Court Disposition

Previous order for revocation rescinded; original parole order continues.

Orders

  • ['The previous order for revocation is rescinded.' 'The original order of parole continues.']