Legal Research
Cases
Re WD (No 3)

Re WD (No 3)

Case [2024] VSC 14 19 December 2023

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION / COMMON LAW DIVISION

S ECR 2023 0280

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic)
AND
IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by WD
BETWEEN
WD	Applicant
V
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS	Respondent

S ECI 2023 06014

IN THE MATTER of an application in the parens patriae jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Victoria
BETWEEN
SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF FAMILIES, FAIRNESS AND HOUSING	Applicant
v
WD	Respondent

---

JUDGE:	Elliott J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	14, 15, 18 and 19 December 2023
DATE OF RULING:	19 December 2023
DATE OF REASONS	1 February 2024
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re WD (No 3)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VSC 14

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for revocation of bail – 12-year-old girl charged with murder – Condition of bail that the applicant remain in a secure lock-up facility in the care of the Secretary to the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing – Accommodation said to have become suddenly unavailable – Applicant said to pose an unacceptable risk – Application dismissed – Bail Act 1977 (Vic), ss 1B, 3, 3AAA, 3B, 4E, 18AE, 18AF.

COURTS AND JUDGES – Parens patriae jurisdiction – Respondent 12-year-old-girl charged with murder – Application for orders authorising the Secretary to the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing to place respondent in a secure welfare service beyond time limit prescribed by statute – Best interests of the child – Application for orders directed at members of Victoria Police in relation to the transportation of the respondent in the event of an emergency and the use of reasonable force – Orders made in parens patriae jurisdiction – Children, Youth and Families Act 2015 (Vic), ss 44, 161B, 173, 289, 534 – Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic), s 38.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For WD	A Waters	Dowling McGregor
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	A Stephanides (solicitor)	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Secretary to the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing	S Fitzgerald	Department of Families, Fairness and Housing
For Victoria Police	L Carter	Victoria Police Legal Services Department

HIS HONOUR:

A. Introduction

These reasons concern 2 separate applications made in 2 separate proceedings. Both relate to arrangements for the care and custody of a 13-year-old girl who has been charged with murder (“WD”).[1] The Secretary to the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing (“the Secretary”) has parental responsibility for WD.[2]
[1]A pseudonym has been used to protect the identity of WD and to ensure compliance with s 534(1)(a)(ii) of the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005 (Vic). WD was 12 at the time of the applications and 13 at the time these reasons were delivered.
[2]Pursuant to a “care by Secretary” order made under s 289(1) of the Children, Youth and Families Act.
The first of these applications (“the Revocation Application”) was made by the Director of Public Prosecutions (“the Director”) on…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Re WD (No 3)

Details

AGLC: Re WD (No 3) [2024] VSC 14
Case: [2024] VSC 14
Decision Date: 19 December 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Re WD (No 3), the applicant, a 12-year-old girl, applied to the Court for the revocation of her bail conditions and for an extension of the statutory time limit to remain in a secure lock-up facility. The application was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The applicant was charged with murder and was subject to a condition of bail that she remain in a secure lock-up facility in the care of the Secretary to the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the accommodation for the applicant had suddenly become unavailable, whether the applicant posed an unacceptable risk, and whether the Court should make orders in its parens patriae jurisdiction authorising the Secretary to place the respondent in a secure welfare service beyond the time limit prescribed by statute. The Court was also required to consider whether to make orders directed at members of Victoria Police in relation to the transportation of the respondent in the event of an emergency and the use of reasonable force.

The Court found that the accommodation for the applicant had not suddenly become unavailable and that the applicant did not pose an unacceptable risk. The Court also found that it was in the best interests of the child to make orders in its parens patriae jurisdiction authorising the Secretary to place the respondent in a secure welfare service beyond the time limit prescribed by statute. The Court made orders in relation to the transportation of the respondent in the event of an emergency and the use of reasonable force. The application for the revocation of bail was dismissed.

The Court made orders in its parens patriae jurisdiction authorising the Secretary to the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing to place the respondent in a secure welfare service beyond the time limit prescribed by statute. The Court also made orders directed at members of Victoria Police in relation to the transportation of the respondent in the event of an emergency and the use of reasonable force. The orders were made under the Children, Youth and Families Act 2015 (Vic) and the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic).

Orders