Re Oliver [2021] NSWChC 1

The term 'party' in s 98(2A) of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1988 includes the subject child. As Oliver is incapable of giving proper instructions to a legal representative, the Court is therefore required, under s 98(2A), to appoint a guardian ad litem for him.

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 22 January 2021
Procedural Posture: Care Proceedings / Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem
Outcome: Appointment of guardian ad litem for the child under s 98(2A); matter adjourned to allow for this appointment.
Legal Topics: ['party Status of Child' 'appointment of Guardian Ad Litem' 'statutory Interpretation of Children and Young Persons (care and Protection) Act 1988']

['child Law' 'care and Protection'] ['party Status of Child' 'appointment of Guardian Ad Litem' 'statutory Interpretation of Children and Young Persons (care and Protection) Act 1988']

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

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings / Application for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether a child is a party to care proceedings under s 98(2A) of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1988' 'Whether the Court must appoint a guardian ad litem for a child incapable of giving proper instructions']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appointment of guardian ad litem for the child under s 98(2A); matter adjourned to allow for this appointment.

Orders

['A guardian ad litem is appointed for the child (Oliver) under s 98(2A) of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1988.' 'Proceedings are adjourned for the appointment to occur.']

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.