David White v The Director-General Department of Human Services, Ms Green and Ms Wells (Independent Children's Lawyer) [2011] NSWDC 106

David White v The Director-General Department of Human Services, Ms Green and Ms Wells (Independent Children's Lawyer) [2011] NSWDC 106

The children remained in need of care and protection to differing degrees, but the Director-General's assessments of no realistic possibility of restoration were not accepted for Benjamin, Colin and Edward because the parents had taken significant practical steps to address the issues that led to removal, including parenting programs, anger management, improved accommodation and financial arrangements. Amy's sexual abuse allegation was not proved on the balance of probabilities, but her maintained belief in the allegation and wish to remain with her carer meant that returning her to a home including the father would not meet her psychological needs. For Benjamin and Colin, orders removing...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Against Care Orders Made by the Children's Court / Appeal by Way of a New Hearing in the District Court of New South Wales
Outcome
The appeal was allowed in part; the Children's Court decision was confirmed for Amy, different permanency plans involving restoration were directed for Benjamin, Colin and Edward, and further submissions were directed for Diane.
Legal Topics
['care Orders' 'children in Need of Care and Protection' 'realistic Possibility of Restoration' 'parental Responsibility' 'paramountcy Principle' 'least Intrusive Intervention' 'sexual Abuse Allegation' 'sexualised Behaviour' 'permanency Planning']
['child Protection Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['care Orders' 'children in Need of Care and Protection' 'realistic Possibility of Restoration' 'parental Responsibility' 'paramountcy Principle' 'least Intrusive Intervention' 'sexual Abuse Allegation' 'sexualised Behaviour' 'permanency 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

Civil Appeal Against Care Orders Made by the Children's Court / Appeal by Way of a New Hearing in the District Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the children were in need of care and protection.' 'Whether there was a realistic possibility of restoration of the children to their parents.' 'Whether parental responsibility should remain allocated away from the parents.' "Whether Amy's allegation of sexual abuse by the father was proved or nevertheless created an unacceptable risk of harm or unmet psychological needs." "How Benjamin's sexualised behaviour affected restoration and contact with his sisters." 'Whether the proposed orders were the least intrusive intervention consistent with protecting the children from harm and promoting their development.' 'Whether permanency planning had been appropriately and adequately addressed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The children remained in need of care and protection to differing degrees, but the Director-General's assessments of no realistic possibility of restoration were not accepted for Benjamin, Colin and Edward because the parents had taken significant practical steps to address the issues that led to removal, including parenting programs, anger management, improved accommodation and financial arrangements. Amy's sexual abuse allegation was not proved on the balance of probabilities, but her maintained belief in the allegation and wish to remain with her carer meant that returning her to a home including the father would not meet her psychological needs. For Benjamin and Colin, orders removing...

Court Disposition

The appeal was allowed in part; the Children's Court decision was confirmed for Amy, different permanency plans involving restoration were directed for Benjamin, Colin and Edward, and further submissions were directed for Diane.

Orders

  • ["Accept the assessment of the Director-General in respect of Amy and confirm the decision of the Children's Court in respect of Amy." 'Direct the Director-General to prepare different permanency plans, involving restoration, for Benjamin and Colin.' 'Direct the Director-General to prepare a different permanency...