Director-General, Department of Human Services and Raddison

The Director-General of the Department of Human Services (the Director-General) sought to appeal a decision of the Children's Court of Victoria which had dismissed its application for an interim accommodation order in relation to a child, Raddison. The Director-General contended that the child was in need of protection and that an interim accommodation order was necessary to ensure the child's safety and well-being. The matter came before Stevenson J of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Children's Court had erred in law by dismissing the Director-General's application for an interim accommodation order. Specifically, the Court was required to consider the proper interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the *Children, Youth and Families Act 2005* (Vic) concerning the threshold for making such orders and the assessment of risk to a child.

Stevenson J found that the Children's Court had misconstrued the relevant statutory provisions. His Honour held that the Children's Court had applied an incorrect and overly stringent test when assessing the risk of harm to the child, requiring a higher degree of certainty than the legislation mandated. The Court reiterated that the test for an interim accommodation order requires the Children's Court to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the child is in need of protection, and that it is necessary to make the order to ensure the child's safety or well-being. The Court emphasised that the assessment of risk is a forward-looking exercise, and that the Children's Court had failed to properly consider the available evidence in this regard.

The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the Children's Court for redetermination in accordance with the principles articulated by Stevenson J.