CNM v Chief Executive, Department for Child Protection

The applicant sought leave to appeal from a decision of the primary judge. The dispute concerned an "adverse finding" made by the respondent, the Chief Executive of the Department for Child Protection, which identified a risk of domestic violence based on the applicant's alleged use of violence and coercive control. This finding arose from a notification received by the Department regarding a child exhibiting indicators of sexual harm. Following an investigation, the Department determined the children were safe in their mother's care, referred them to therapy, and closed the file. The applicant sought judicial review of the adverse finding, alleging a failure to accord procedural fairness and legal unreasonableness, specifically a lack of prior notice, opportunity to respond, and evidentiary support for the finding.

The court was required to determine whether there was a reasonably arguable basis for impugning the primary judge's reasoning or conclusion, and whether the interests of justice favoured granting leave to appeal. The applicant's grounds for judicial review centred on the respondent's alleged failure to provide procedural fairness by not giving prior notice of the adverse finding or an opportunity to respond, and the alleged unreasonableness and lack of evidence supporting the finding.

The court found that the applicant had not identified any reasonably arguable basis for challenging the primary judge's decision. The court considered the submissions made by the applicant in support of the proposed appeal and concluded they did not provide a sufficient basis to overturn the primary judge's reasoning or conclusion. The court noted that the proposed appeal did not raise any issue of general principle and related to a matter of limited practical or legal significance.

Consequently, the court determined that the interests of justice did not favour granting leave to appeal. The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.