IO v Department of Family and Community Services (CSD) [2012] NSWADTAP 42

Administrative Decisions Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: IO v Department of Family and Community Services (CSD) [2012] NSWADTAP 42 Hearing dates: 2 October 2012 Decision date: 30 October 2012 Before: Judge K P O'Connor, President Decision: Appeal dismissed Catchwords: JURISDICTION - Community Services - Children in Out of Home Care - Decision not to make financial assistance payment to Carer - Whether Reviewable - Held No Jurisdiction - Appeal Dismissed. Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998, s 245 Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 Community Services (Complaints, Reviews and Monitoring) Act 1993 Cases Cited: IO v Department of Family and Community Services [2012] NSWADT 158 Category: Principal judgment Parties: IO (Appellant) Department of Family and Community Services (Respondent) Representation: Counsel M Allars (Respondent) In person (Appellant) Dr V Nguyen (Respondent) File Number(s): 129027 Publication restriction: s 126 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Decision under appeal Citation: IO v Department of Family and Community Services [2012] NSWADT 158 Date of Decision: 2012-08-01 00:00:00 Before: Community Services Division File Number(s): 124013

REASON FOR DECISION 1On 14 May 2012 the appellant lodged an application for review with the Tribunal naming the Minister for Family and Community Services as the respondent. The Tribunal declined to hear the application of the ground that it was outside jurisdiction: IO v Department of Family and Community Services [2012] NSWADT 158 (1 August 2012, Higgins DP). 2On 7 August 2012, the appellant lodged an appeal pursuant to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997, ss 112, 113. 3I convened a directions hearing in relation to the appeal on 2 October 2012. Both parties were present, the appellant without representation, and the Minister represented by Ms Allars of counsel. 4Both parties made oral submissions going to the substance of the dispute, and the procedure to be followed to dispose of the matter. 5I decided that, as a presidential member, I should hear the appeal sitting alone (as permitted by the ADT Act in relation to appeals involving ancillary functions of the Tribunal, jurisdiction being such a function: s 113(2E)). 6After discussion with the parties, I directed that the appeal proceed thereafter on the papers as permitted by the ADT Act, s 76.