NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: GR v Secretary, Department of Families, Disabilities and Community Services (No 2) [2020] NSWCA 198 Hearing dates: 26 August 2020 Date of orders: 28 August 2020 Decision date: 28 August 2020 Before: Basten JA; McCallum JA Decision: (1) Refuse the application for leave to appeal from the interlocutory orders made (i) by Robb J on 2 April 2020; (ii) by Kunc J on 24 April 2020, and (iii) by Slattery J on 22 May 2020. (2) Order that the applicant pay the first and second respondents' costs in this Court, based on common representation. Catchwords: APPEALS – leave to appeal – interlocutory orders – procedural orders in Equity Division – constraints on applicant's access to parens patriae jurisdiction – abuses of process – repeated applications to the Court – disregard of procedural requirements APPEALS – leave to appeal – interlocutory orders – interlocutory orders refusing relief in parens patriae jurisdiction – final care orders made in Children's Court – relief sought would reverse orders made by Children's Court – separate statutory appeal from Children's Court orders pending in Equity Division Legislation Cited: Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW), ss 44, 83, 91, 247 Children's Court Act 1987 (NSW), s 22A Cases Cited: GR v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice [2020] NSWSC 739 GR v Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services [2020] NSWSC 348 GR v Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services and Justice (No 4) [2020] NSWSC 457 GR v Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services and Justice [2020] NSWSC 607 In Re Will of FW Gilbert (dec'd) (1946) 46 SR (NSW) 318 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: GR (Applicant) Secretary, Families, Disabilities and Community Services (First Respondent) The Minister, Families, Disabilities and Community Services (Second Respondent) BB (Third Respondent) AB (Fourth Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Applicant self-represented Mr D Kell SC / Mr M Anderson (First and Second Respondents) Ms E Stolier (Fourth Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate