ASK v The Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services [2014] NSWDC 247

ASK v The Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services [2014] NSWDC 247

The Court found no realistic possibility of restoration of the children to the mother. Although it did not find an unacceptable risk of physical abuse, it found the mother could not provide consistent or stable parenting, lacked sufficient insight into the children's needs, had limited ability to manage the impact of her behaviour on them, and that the children were settled and prospering in their current placements. The children would be at risk if restored to the mother, and P and S would be at risk of emotional pressure and emotional over-reaction if contact with the mother were unsupervised. The best interests, safety, welfare and well-being of the children required dismissal of the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S 91 of the Children and Young Persons (care and Protection) Act 1998 From Orders of a Children's Court Magistrate in Care and Protection Proceedings / Principal Judgment After Rehearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. First Respondent's cross-appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
['realistic Possibility of Restoration' 'parental Responsibility' 'permanency Planning' 'contact Orders' 'unacceptable Risk of Harm' 'cultural Planning']
['children Law' 'care and Protection'] ['realistic Possibility of Restoration' 'parental Responsibility' 'permanency Planning' 'contact Orders' 'unacceptable Risk of Harm' 'cultural Planning']

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 Under S 91 of the Children and Young Persons (care and Protection) Act 1998 From Orders of a Children's Court Magistrate in Care and Protection Proceedings / Principal Judgment After Rehearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was a realistic possibility of restoration of JK, FK, PK and SK to the mother.' 'Whether parental responsibility for JK, FK, PK and SK should be allocated to the Minister until each child attains the age of 18 years.' 'Whether the children would be at unacceptable risk of harm if restored to the mother.' 'What contact orders should be made between the children, their mother, their father, and their siblings, including whether contact with the mother should be supervised.' 'Whether the permanency planning and cultural planning proposals were appropriate.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found no realistic possibility of restoration of the children to the mother. Although it did not find an unacceptable risk of physical abuse, it found the mother could not provide consistent or stable parenting, lacked sufficient insight into the children's needs, had limited ability to manage the impact of her behaviour on them, and that the children were settled and prospering in their current placements. The children would be at risk if restored to the mother, and P and S would be at risk of emotional pressure and emotional over-reaction if contact with the mother were unsupervised. The best interests, safety, welfare and well-being of the children required dismissal of the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. First Respondent's cross-appeal allowed.

Orders

  • ["The appellant's appeal be dismissed and the first respondent's cross appeal be allowed." 'Pursuant to section 79(1)(b) of the Children and Young Persons (Care & Protection) Act 1998, parental responsibility for JK, FK, PK and SK be allocated to the Minister for Family and Community Services until each child...