The Secretary of the Department of Communities and Justice (DCJ) and the Stonsky Children [2019] NSWChC 8

The Secretary of the Department of Communities and Justice (DCJ) and the Stonsky Children [2019] NSWChC 8

The adoption plan was real rather than merely aspirational because Madeline and Casper had been assessed, had extensive foster care and adoption experience, had successfully adopted three other children, wished to adopt the three children and keep the siblings together, and the children were settling well. The circumstances did not amount to special circumstances warranting an order longer than 24 months, because a recent placement, possible delays in adoption, and a possible s 90 application were not out of the ordinary in care proceedings. However, the Care Plan did not appropriately and adequately address permanency planning because it lacked a mechanism requiring the Secretary to...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Care and Protection / Hearing on Whether the Secretary's Proposed Short Term Care Orders Allocating Parental Responsibility to the Minister for Two Years With a View to Adoption Were Appropriate and Adequate
Outcome
The Court declined to approve the proposed permanency plan as appropriately and adequately addressing permanency planning and directed the Secretary to prepare a different permanency plan.
Legal Topics
['permanency Planning' 'short Term Care Orders' 'parental Responsibility to the Minister' 'adoption' 'special Circumstances' 'section 90 Rescission or Variation']
['care and Protection'] ['permanency Planning' 'short Term Care Orders' 'parental Responsibility to the Minister' 'adoption' 'special Circumstances' 'section 90 Rescission or Variation']

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

Care and Protection / Hearing on Whether the Secretary's Proposed Short Term Care Orders Allocating Parental Responsibility to the Minister for Two Years With a View to Adoption Were Appropriate and Adequate

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Secretary's proposed short term care orders of parental responsibility to the Minister for two years with a view to adoption were appropriate and adequate." 'Whether the adoption plan was real or merely aspirational given the recent placement with proposed adoptive carers.' 'Whether special circumstances warranted an order allocating parental responsibility to the Minister for longer than 24 months.' 'Whether the Care Plan adequately addressed what would occur if adoption was delayed or did not proceed before the two year order expired.']

Ratio Decidendi

The adoption plan was real rather than merely aspirational because Madeline and Casper had been assessed, had extensive foster care and adoption experience, had successfully adopted three other children, wished to adopt the three children and keep the siblings together, and the children were settling well. The circumstances did not amount to special circumstances warranting an order longer than 24 months, because a recent placement, possible delays in adoption, and a possible s 90 application were not out of the ordinary in care proceedings. However, the Care Plan did not appropriately and adequately address permanency planning because it lacked a mechanism requiring the Secretary to...

Court Disposition

The Court declined to approve the proposed permanency plan as appropriately and adequately addressing permanency planning and directed the Secretary to prepare a different permanency plan.

Orders

  • ['The Court directs the Secretary to prepare a different permanency plan.']