Smith & anor v Minister for Community Services [2004] NSWADT 98

Smith & anor v Minister for Community Services [2004] NSWADT 98

The Tribunal had no jurisdiction. The children had not been placed with the Applicants under s 91(1)(d) of the Children (Care and Protection) Act 1987 because the Children's Court had not made the necessary order placing them under the Minister's parental responsibility, so their removal was not a reviewable...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Application to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal for Review of Decisions Concerning Foster Care Placement/removal / Jurisdiction Challenge; Principal Matter
Outcome
Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
['tribunal Jurisdiction' 'reviewable Decisions' 'foster Carers' 'authorised Carers' 'care and Protection Orders']
['administrative Law' 'community Services' 'child Care and Protection'] ['tribunal Jurisdiction' 'reviewable Decisions' 'foster Carers' 'authorised Carers' 'care and Protection Orders']

Source-derived case record

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 to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal for Review of Decisions Concerning Foster Care Placement/removal / Jurisdiction Challenge; Principal Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the 1 April 2003 decision to remove three children from the Applicants' care." "Whether the 28 July 2003 recommendation that no further children be placed in the Applicants' care was, or had become, a reviewable decision by the Minister." 'Whether the Applicants were authorised carers for the purposes of s 245(1)(a) of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal had no jurisdiction. The children had not been placed with the Applicants under s 91(1)(d) of the Children (Care and Protection) Act 1987 because the Children's Court had not made the necessary order placing them under the Minister's parental responsibility, so their removal was not a reviewable decision under s 91(1)(e). The Applicants were also not authorised carers for the purposes of s 245 of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 because the children had been removed from their care before cl 22D commenced, so any Ministerial decision or recommendation about future placements was not reviewable by them under that provision.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • ['Application is dismissed']