NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: DB v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice [2024] NSWSC 470 Hearing dates: 12 and 18 April 2024 Decision date: 29 April 2024 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Lindsay J Decision: Subject to allowing the parties an opportunity to be heard as to the form of the orders to be made, the plaintiff's summons for parens patriae relief is to be dismissed, leaving the plaintiff to pursue his appeal to the District Court of NSW from orders made by the Children's Court of NSW under the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 NSW Catchwords: FAMILY LAW AND CHILD WELFARE – Parens patriae jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – Grandfather of child in care simultaneously lodges an appeal to the District Court of NSW from orders of the Children's Court of NSW and applies to the Supreme Court for parens patriae orders - Supreme Court proceedings summarily dismissed as vexatious and an abuse of process – Best interests of child favour expedited determination of District Court appeal Legislation Cited: Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 NSW Children's Guardian Act 2019 NSW Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Regulation 2012 NSW Cases Cited: CAC v The Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services [2015] NSWCA 105 George v Children's Court of New South Wales [2003] NSWCA 389; 59 NSWLR 232 Harris v Department of Communities and Justice [2021] NSWSC 519 Re Eve [1986] 2 SCR 388; (1986) 31 DLR (4th) 1 Re Frieda and Geoffrey [2009] NSWSC 133; 40 Fam LR 608 Re Victoria [2002] NSWSC 647; (2002) 29 Fam LR 157 Re W and L (Parameters of Protected Estate Management Orders [2014] NSWSC 1106 RH v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice [2021] NSWCA 101 Secretary, Department of Health and Community Services v JWB and SMB (Marion's Case) (1992) 175 CLR 218 Spencer v Commonwealth (2010) 241 CLR 118 Waltons v Gardiner (1993) 177 CLR 378 Wellesley v Duke of Beaufort (1827) 2 Russ 1; 38 ER 236 Wentworth v Rogers (No 5) (1986) 5 NSWLR 534 Williams v Spautz (1992) 174 CLR 509 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Plaintiff: DB, maternal grandfather of a child in care First Defendant: Secretary, NSW Department of Communities and Justice Second Defendant: Lifestyle Solutions Australia Ltd Third Defendant: Children's Court of NSW Fourth Defendant: [Removed as a party] Fifth Defendant: Birth father of the child in care Representation: Counsel: Plaintiff: Self represented First Defendant: Claire Baldwin (senior solicitor for Crown Solicitor) and Greta Bromwich (solicitor advocate for Crown Solicitor) Second Defendant: Luke Geary, Solicitor Third Defendant: Submitting appearance. Fifth Defendant: No appearance Independent Legal Representative: Violet Willoughby
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