K (No. 2) -v- Minister for Community Services [2000] NSWADT 101

K (No. 2) -v- Minister for Community Services [2000] NSWADT 101

F's welfare and interests would be best served by remaining under the guardianship of the Minister. Although F's wishes were relevant, they were not determinative and had changed during the hearing after she learned S would be living with Mr K. F was making reasonable progress in her current placement, while Mr K showed little appreciation of the impact of his previous conduct, minimised that conduct, showed no remorse, and did not demonstrate understanding of the significant skills required to meet F's complex emotional needs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Guardianship Refusal to Terminate Guardianship of a Ward / Application for Review of the Delegate's Decision Refusing to Terminate the Minister's Guardianship of F
Outcome
The decision refusing to terminate the Minister's guardianship of F was affirmed.
Legal Topics
['merits Review' 'termination of Guardianship' 'welfare and Interests of a Ward' 'wishes of the Child' 'internal Review and Notice of Review Rights']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection' 'guardianship'] ['merits Review' 'termination of Guardianship' 'welfare and Interests of a Ward' 'wishes of the Child' 'internal Review and Notice of Review Rights']

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

Guardianship Refusal to Terminate Guardianship of a Ward / Application for Review of the Delegate's Decision Refusing to Terminate the Minister's Guardianship of F

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether, having regard to F's wishes, it would promote her welfare and be in her interests to be restored to the care of her natural father or to remain under the guardianship of the Minister." 'Whether the Tribunal should proceed to hear the matter despite the absence of an internal review.']

Ratio Decidendi

F's welfare and interests would be best served by remaining under the guardianship of the Minister. Although F's wishes were relevant, they were not determinative and had changed during the hearing after she learned S would be living with Mr K. F was making reasonable progress in her current placement, while Mr K showed little appreciation of the impact of his previous conduct, minimised that conduct, showed no remorse, and did not demonstrate understanding of the significant skills required to meet F's complex emotional needs.

Court Disposition

The decision refusing to terminate the Minister's guardianship of F was affirmed.

Orders

  • ["The decision made by the delegate of the Minister for Community Services under s 112(1)(e) of the Children (Care and Protection) Act 1987, to refuse to terminate the Minister's guardianship of F K, is affirmed."]