L & Anor v SA; H-P v SA

(2017) 129 SASR 180; [2017] SASCFC 133

South Australia Full Court

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Reviewable decisions and conduct
4. › Whether internal departmental investigation reports amenable to judicial review
5. › Reports not made in exercise of statutory or prerogative power
6. › No legal consequences flowing from reports
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Prerogative writs and orders
4. › Certiorari
5. › Whether reports and endorsements amenable to relief in nature of certiorari
6. › No exercise of public power
1. Administrative Law
2. › Procedural fairness
3. › Obligation to accord procedural fairness
4. › Whether obligation arises from departmental statements or circulars
5. › Legitimate expectation
6. › Whether departmental representations create enforceable obligation
7. › Children's Protection Act 1993 (SA)
1. Administrative Law
2. › Procedural fairness
3. › Interests attracting protection
4. › Reputational interests
5. › Whether internal communications between officers with common public duty attract obligation of procedural fairness
6. › Analogy with qualified privilege in defamation

Quick Take

Internal departmental investigation reports that are not made in exercise of statutory or prerogative power and do not of themselves affect legal rights are not amenable to judicial review, even where they contain adverse findings about individuals. Reputational interests do not attract procedural fairness obligations where reports are communicated only between officers with a shared public duty. Non-compliance with procedural requirements under ss 4, 5 and 51 of the Children's Protection Act 1993 (SA) does not invalidate placement decisions; the appropriate remedy is review in the Youth Court where the child's interests are paramount.