CDK v Department of Communities (Child Safety Services)

[2011] QCAT 1

CITATION: CDK v Department of Communities (Child Safety Services) [2011] QCAT 1

PARTIES:	CDK
v
Department of Communities (Child Safety Services)

APPLICATION NUMBER:   CSR036-09

MATTER TYPE: Children’s matters

HEARING DATE:     7 January 2011

HEARD AT:  Brisbane

DECISION OF: C Endicott, senior member

DELIVERED ON: 7 January 2011

DELIVERED AT:      Brisbane

ORDERS MADE: Application for review dismissed

CATCHWORDS :  CHILD PROTECTION - Early end to proceedings – section 47 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 – permitting the application for review to continue tantamount to an abuse of process  

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

The hearing took place on the papers in the absence of the parties. 

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. An application was made to the Children Services Tribunal on 2 March 2009 by CDK (the applicant) seeking to review a decision made by Department of Communities (Child Safety Services) (the respondent) in a letter dated 25 February 2009 removing her grandchildren from her care. 

2. The application for review was set down for hearing for 10 August 2009 but was adjourned on 6 August 2009 at the request of the applicant.  The tribunal directed that the application for review was to be re-listed for hearing at the request of either party following a further review of CDK’s conditional kinship carer status after a period of 12 weeks.   

3. Neither party has subsequently requested a hearing of the application for review.    From 1 December 2009 the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal has replaced the Children Services Tribunal. The review application was a pending proceeding and is able to be determined by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the tribunal) under the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (the Act). 

4. On 23 March 2010 a staff member from the tribunal registry wrote to CDK asking whether she wished to proceed with her application.  She was informed that if she did not respond to the enquiry, her application would be considered for dismissal.   No response was received from CDK.    

5. CDK had requested a twelve week adjournment of the hearing of her application to enable a review of her kinship carer status to be completed.  If she had wanted the application to proceed to hearing after her kinship carer status had been resolved, she had an opportunity to request a hearing date after November 2009.  She was reminded of the outstanding position with her application for review in March 2010 but again she failed to take steps towards having her application for review listed for hearing.    

6. The tribunal must deal with matters in a way that is accessible, fair, just, economical, informal and quick.  A party to a proceeding in the tribunal is under an obligation set out in section 45 of the Act to act quickly in any dealing relevant to the proceeding.  The applicant in this case has failed to take adequate steps to proceed with her application for review since August 2009. 

7. Section 47 of the Act gives the tribunal power to bring a proceeding to an early end if the tribunal considers that an application is frivolous, vexatious or misconceived or is lacking in substance or is otherwise an abuse of process. The tribunal considers that it is tantamount to an abuse of process to permit the application for review to reman on foot when CDK has failed since November 2009 to take steps to proceed with her application despite her having an adequate opportunity to do so.

8. The tribunal considers that the review application must be dismissed under section 47 of the Act.