GH v TUSLA Child and Family Agency & Ors (Approved) [2026] IECA 31 (12 March 2026)

GH v TUSLA Child and Family Agency & Ors (Approved) [2026] IECA 31 (12 March 2026)

The applicant was affected in a real and meaningful sense by the CFA's decision, satisfying the test for standing. Once standing is established, the applicant is entitled to be informed of the reasons for the decision to enable effective judicial review. The CFA's published policy does not preclude the provision of reasons to the complainant, and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
[2026] IECA 31
Parties
Applicant/respondent: G. H.; Respondent/appellant: The Child and Family Agency; Respondents/appellant: Ireland and the Attorney General; Notice Party: X. Y.; Notice Party: The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
12 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Appeal (judicial Review) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed.
Legal Topics
Obligation to Give Reasons, Standing (locus Standi), Child Protection Assessments, Procedural Fairness, Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Child Law Judicial Review Obligation to Give Reasons Standing (locus Standi) Child Protection Assessments Procedural Fairness Statutory Interpretation

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 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G. H.

Applicant/respondent

The Child and Family Agency

Respondent/appellant

Ireland and the Attorney General

Respondents/appellant

X. Y.

Notice Party

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Appeal (judicial Review) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Child and Family Agency is under a legal duty to provide the applicant with reasons for a decision that a substantiation assessment was unfounded
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has standing to challenge the decision
  3. 3 Whether published policy (CASP) precludes the giving of reasons to the complainant

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was affected in a real and meaningful sense by the CFA's decision, satisfying the test for standing. Once standing is established, the applicant is entitled to be informed of the reasons for the decision to enable effective judicial review. The CFA's published policy does not preclude the provision of reasons to the complainant, and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed.

Orders

  • CFA to provide the applicant with reasons for the decision of 19 December 2022.
  • Provisional order for costs in favour of the applicant against the CFA, subject to further submissions.