Section 50 of the Lukautim Pikinini Act 2015 is short but constitutionally important.
(1) Where the Office for Child and Family Services or a police officer removes a child under this Division, the Office or the police officer, as the case may be, shall promptly make all reasonable efforts to notify each parent of the child’s removal.
(2) Unless it is impracticable to do so, notification shall be in writing and shall include a statement of the reasons for removing the child.
Reading the duty
| Element | What it requires |
|---|---|
| “Promptly” | Without delay — not when convenient |
| “All reasonable efforts” | Real attempts, not one telephone call to a disconnected number |
| “Each parent” | Both parents, even where only one had the child |
| “In writing…with reasons” | A written statement of why the child was taken, unless impracticable |
The Act says each parent, not the parent who had the child. Where parents are separated, and the child is removed from one household, the other parent must still be notified.
That matters practically. The other parent may be able to care for the child immediately — which is precisely the least intrusive outcome section 5(1)(g) requires, and consistent with (d) and (j): the family is the preferred environment, and alternative care should be found within it.
Why the reasons must be given
Constitution section 59 makes natural justice a rule of the underlying law, its minimum requirement being to act fairly and to be seen to act fairly. A parent cannot respond to a removal they do not understand.
Written reasons let a parent do three things:
- Correct a mistake — the concern may rest on a misunderstanding the parent can resolve at once;
- Fix the problem — consistent with section 5(1)(h), that interventions be aimed at remedying the harmful situation and returning the child;
- Prepare for court — a child protection hearing follows, and the parent is entitled to know the case.
Section 1 of the Act declares that it restricts qualified rights — including privacy (s 49) and freedom from arbitrary search and entry (s 44) — for the purposes of Constitution section 38. Section 50 is one of the safeguards that makes that restriction proportionate.
The two qualifications
Subsection (1) requires all reasonable efforts — not a guaranteed result. Where a parent genuinely cannot be found, the duty is discharged by making those efforts.
Subsection (2) excuses writing where it is impracticable — a parent who cannot read, or is in a remote place with no postal address, or where urgency makes oral notification the only option.
Impracticability under subsection (2) relieves the form of notification. It does not relieve the duty to notify under subsection (1), which is unqualified apart from “reasonable efforts”.
So oral notification, in a language the parent understands, remains required. Compare section 5(2)(a), which requires information to be given to the child in a manner and language he can understand.
Which removals section 50 covers
Section 50 sits in Division 3 of Part V — Emergency Protection Powers. It applies to a removal under:
- Section 46 — a child in immediate danger;
- Section 49 — a lost or runaway child;
- Section 48 — an abandoned child, where subsection (4) separately requires the Office to take all reasonable steps to notify the child’s parent of steps taken.
For a removal following a section 43 search, section 44 sits in Division 2. In practice the warrant application will have been made because a contravention was suspected, and the parent will know of the search; but the better course, given section 5 and the requirements of natural justice, is to give the same notice.
Notification is not merely a formality. Once a child is removed, section 51 gives the Office the care of the child until the child is returned or a Court makes an order. A parent who has been told what happened and why can engage with that process; a parent left in the dark cannot. And section 42(3) makes notification of the earlier investigation discretionary precisely so that the mandatory duty attaches at the point it matters most — when the child has actually been taken.
Sources
- Lukautim Pikinini Act 2015 — ss 1, 5, 42–52, 93
- Constitution — ss 38, 44, 49, 59
Before relying on anything here, read the current text of the Marriage Act (Chapter 280) and check for later amendments. If a decision matters to you, get advice — start with the Office of the Public Solicitor, or find a firm in the law firms directory.