25 May 2023
XXXX [ ]
- Citation
- B-05(H)-34-01/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
- Court
- H
- Case number
- B-05(H)-34-01/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
The Court held the probation reports failed to satisfy s.75(1)(b) Child Act 2001 because they did not explain why the child was unsuitable for rehabilitation in an approved school; accordingly the orders sending the appellant to Henry Gurney School were illegal and the learned Judicial Commissioner had misdirected herself; appellate intervention was warranted and the proper disposition was to substitute a non-custodial community service order of 100 hours under s.91(1)(da) Child Act 2001.