GR v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice [2020] NSWSC 892

GR v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice [2020] NSWSC 892

Leave was refused because, after dismissal of the substance of the principal proceedings and with statutory appeal proceedings pending, the present proceedings were not an appropriate vehicle for the proposed parens patriae application; the proposed application sought, without any material change in circumstances, to re-agitate questions already determined and was an abuse of process; and the material did not show a serious threat to the child's welfare from current treatment under the Minister's care, with disputed questions more appropriately addressed in the statutory appeal proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to File a Notice of Motion for an Urgent Interlocutory Application Invoking Parens Patriae Jurisdiction / Equity Duty List; Determined on the Papers by Email Exchanges
Outcome
Application for leave to file a notice of motion refused.
Legal Topics
['duty List Applications' 'parens Patriae Jurisdiction' 'inherent Jurisdiction' 'abuse of Process' 'vexatious or Unwarranted Applications' 'care and Protection Proceedings' "statutory Appeal From Children's Court Orders"]
['civil Procedure' 'equity' 'child Welfare and Protection'] ['duty List Applications' 'parens Patriae Jurisdiction' 'inherent Jurisdiction' 'abuse of Process' 'vexatious or Unwarranted Applications' 'care and Protection Proceedings' "statutory Appeal From Children's Court Orders"]

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

Application for Leave to File a Notice of Motion for an Urgent Interlocutory Application Invoking Parens Patriae Jurisdiction / Equity Duty List; Determined on the Papers by Email Exchanges

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to file a notice of motion for an urgent interlocutory application to the Duty Judge seeking parens patriae relief concerning the child.' 'Whether the current proceedings were an appropriate vehicle for the proposed parens patriae application given dismissal of the principal proceedings and the pending statutory appeal proceedings.' 'Whether the proposed application was an abuse of process by re-agitating matters previously determined without any material change in circumstances.' "Whether the evidence established any serious urgent threat to the child's welfare from current medical treatment or care arrangements."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because, after dismissal of the substance of the principal proceedings and with statutory appeal proceedings pending, the present proceedings were not an appropriate vehicle for the proposed parens patriae application; the proposed application sought, without any material change in circumstances, to re-agitate questions already determined and was an abuse of process; and the material did not show a serious threat to the child's welfare from current treatment under the Minister's care, with disputed questions more appropriately addressed in the statutory appeal proceedings.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to file a notice of motion refused.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's application for leave to file a notice of motion to make an urgent interlocutory application to the Duty Judge for parens patriae relief is refused."]