Re M (No 8)

The case of Re M (No 8) involves the plaintiff, who is seeking an extension of time to file her summons for leave to appeal a decision made under section 91 of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW). The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff's application is related to an earlier judgment in Re M (6), where care orders were made concerning the children. The plaintiff now seeks to either rescind or vary these care orders under section 90 of the Care Act.

The primary legal issue the court had to decide was whether the plaintiff's conduct was such that it would justify the court in exploring the questions outlined at [194] of the principal judgment. These questions pertain to the potential grounds for rescission or variation of the care orders. The court needed to assess whether there was a likelihood that the plaintiff's conduct would change in a manner that would warrant reconsideration of the existing orders.

The court found that the plaintiff had not demonstrated a likelihood of future conduct that would justify the court in exploring the outlined questions. Consequently, the court dismissed the plaintiff's application. The reasoning was that the plaintiff's past conduct did not provide sufficient grounds to warrant further investigation into the potential rescission or variation of the care orders. As a result, the questions at [194] of the principal judgment were not considered.

In summary, the Supreme Court of New South Wales dismissed the plaintiff's application for an extension of time to file her summons for leave to appeal, finding that the plaintiff had not shown a likelihood of changing conduct that would justify further exploration of the issues.