AAC v Director-General, Department of Human Services, Community Services (No 2) [2011] NSWADT 235

Administrative Decisions Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: AAC v Director-General, Department of Human Services, Community Services (No 2) [2011] NSWADT 235 Hearing dates: On the papers Decision date: 10 October 2011 Jurisdiction: Community Services Division Before: S Higgins, Deputy President Decision: The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear and determine this application Catchwords: Jurisdiction - removal of child - whether decision to remove the child was reviewable by the Tribunal Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 Community Services (Complaints, Reviews and Monitoring) Act 1993 Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: AAC (Applicant) Department of Human Services, Community Services (Respondent) Representation: AAC (Applicant in person) Department of Human Services, Community Services (Respondent) File Number(s): 104034 Publication restriction: Section 126 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 applies

REasons for decision

Introduction 1On 8 December 2010, the applicant, AAC, lodged an application seeking review of the decision of the respondent, the Director-General of the Department of Human Services Community Services, to remove a 9 year old child from her care. In addition to that application the applicant sought a stay of the decision of the respondent pending the determination of her review application. 2On 16 December 2010, I heard the applicant's application for a stay. At the conclusion of hearing oral submissions, I made an order refusing the applicant's stay application. At the same time I gave some brief oral reasons for decision in regard to the applicant's stay application. 3During the hearing of the applicant's stay application, the respondent raised an issue about the Tribunal's jurisdiction to hear and determine this application. This issue was formally raised at the directions hearing on 21 February and 3 March 2011. I made orders for the respondent to file and serve written submissions on this issue and gave the applicant an opportunity to respond to these. On 3 March I indicated to the parties that on the material provided I was not persuaded that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear and determine this application. However, I would formally publish a decision and reasons for decision as the jurisdictional issue raised in this matter is an important one. The parties also agreed that the Tribunal was to determine this issue on the papers pursuant to section 76 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (the ADT Act).