Jersey Judgment

In re X Children v [2009] JLR 143 (05 May 2009)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Failure to disclose a confidential plan important to the Minister's decision constituted procedural impropriety, warranting the quashing of the decision.

Court disposition

decision quashed

Orders

  • Decision affecting placement quashed for procedural impropriety

02

Material facts

Parties

X Children

Subject

Health and Social Services Minister

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Judicial Review / Judgment

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Minister failed to disclose all material information, specifically a confidential plan to remodel children's services, to the guardian ad litem and other interested parties in sufficient time for written submissions.
Respondent
The guardian was vaguely aware of changes and disclosure was not required.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Administrative Law principles as applied in Jersey

    Duty to disclose all material information to guardian ad litem and interested parties in sufficient time for submissions before decisions affecting child placement.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Failure to disclose a confidential plan important to the Minister's decision constituted procedural impropriety, warranting the quashing of the decision.

Obiter and limits

  • It is insufficient that the guardian is only vaguely aware of changes; full disclosure is required.

Court disposition

decision quashed

  • Decision affecting placement quashed for procedural impropriety

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2009] JLR 143

[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [

DONATE ] Jersey Law Reports You are here:

BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Law Reports >> In re X Children v [2009] JLR 143 (05 May 2009) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2009/JLR090143.html Cite as: [2009] JLR 143 [ New search ] [ Help ] In re X Children v 2009 JLR 143 (05 May 2009) Administrative Law-judicial review-Health and Social Services Minister-duty to disclose all material information to guardian ad litem of child in care and other interested parties in sufficient time for written submissions about decision affecting placement-decision quashed for procedural impropriety if failure to disclose confidential plan to remodel children's services, important to Minister's decision-insufficient that guardian vaguely aware of changes The document you wish to view is available to registered users or can be purchased as a PDF. To purchase this document in PDF format or alternatively to Register to purchase membership go to the Jersey Law website via this link: 2009 JLR 143 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2009/JLR090143.html

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.