This article focuses on children's capacity to exercise legal rights. It is argued that, undisturbed by the High Court's subsequent decision, the Family Court in B & B & Minister for Immigration and Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] Fam CA has found that a child's capacity is qualified only by contingent factors. This represents a significant development of the prevailing Gillick approach for the determination of the competence of children and young people. Where the Gillick approach requires a positive inquiry as to whether the actual maturity level of an individual child or young person is adequate relative to the question at issue, the new approach focuses on barriers to justice encountered by the child. At least in relation to some matters, capacity is presupposed.
But for the Barriers: Significant Extensions to Children's Capacity
Reprints and Corporate Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:
Academic Permissions
Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?
Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:
If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.
Related research
People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.
Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.
Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.