KB1 v Director-General of the Community Services Directorate (No 2)

[2026] ACTSC 34

Supreme Court of the ACT

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Evidence
2. › Public interest immunity
3. › Claim for exclusion of court record
4. › Care and protection proceedings
5. › Whether public interest best served by refusing disclosure
6. › Balance between procedural fairness to parent and best interests of child
7. › Evidence Act 2011 (ACT), s 130
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Care and protection proceedings
4. › Access to court record
5. › Where applicant excluded from proceedings
6. › Public interest immunity claim over lower court record
1. Children and Young People
2. › Care and protection
3. › Best interests of child as paramount consideration
4. › Qualification of parent's right to be heard
5. › Dispensing with service on parent
6. › Children and Young People Act 2008 (ACT), ss 8, 419, 701, 723

Quick Take

In care and protection proceedings, a claim for public interest immunity over the court record may be upheld even where it effectively denies a parent all procedural fairness, where the paramount consideration of the child's best interests and the cogency of the reasons for non-disclosure so require.

Case Details

Citation[2026] ACTSC 34

CourtACTSC

JurisdictionAustralian Capital Territory

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members.

Relies on6

2025KB1 v Director-General of the Community Services DirectorateACTSC 210
2004Nicopoulos v Commissioner for Corrective ServicesNSWSC 562
1987J v LieschkeHCA 4
1984Alister v R ("Hilton Bombing case")HCA 85
and 2 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in