CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN (PLACEMENT ARRANGEMENT) REGULATIONS 2010

The Regulations operate around four key concepts: authorised carer, emergency carer, eligibility, and responsibilities.

Authorised carer (r 2, Part 2). An individual approved under regulation 5(1). The approval lasts two years from the date of notice or an earlier date specified (r 6). The approval is revocable under regulation 8, including automatically if the clearance notice ceases (r 8(1)). An authorised carer is the default category for ongoing placements.

Emergency carer (r 2, Part 3). An individual approved under regulation 10(1) for a particular child. The approval lasts from the time the child is placed until midnight 3 days later, or if the individual is nominated to be an authorised carer before that, until the CEO’s decision on that nomination (r 11). The approval ends immediately if the placement ends (r 11(2)). Emergency carers do not need a clearance notice but must meet the eligibility in regulation 9: capability to meet Part 4 responsibilities for a short period, fit and proper (based on any matter the CEO considers relevant), willingness to act in accordance with the Act’s objects and principles, and fit and proper mature co‑residents (based on any matter the CEO considers relevant). The CEO also needs criminal history consent from the carer and each mature resident (r 10(1)(e)).

Eligibility is a CEO satisfaction test. For authorised carers it is defined in regulation 3 with six criteria. For emergency carers it is defined in regulation 9 with four criteria (no clearance notice requirement, no explicit requirement for experience or health, and the fit and proper test is based on any matter the CEO considers relevant rather than the enumerated list in r 3(c)). The CEO’s satisfaction is not constrained by objective standards; the CEO may seek information from any person and demand further information. Failure to comply allows the CEO to refuse to consider a nomination (r 5(3)) or to revoke approval (r 8(3)(a)). The concept embeds substantial administrative discretion with limited review mechanisms (the Regulations do not provide for merits review, only the CEO’s own decision).

Responsibilities are set out in Part 4 (r 13‑17) and apply to any carer mentioned in section 78(1)(a) of the Act with whom a child is placed under a placement arrangement. The responsibilities are broad and include mandatory reporting obligations. The carer must notify the CEO immediately of: the child’s death or serious injury requiring medical attention; the child absconding or being abducted; the child harming or threatening to harm self, carer or resident; the carer ceasing to hold a clearance notice; the carer becoming unable or unwilling to meet responsibilities; a mature person moving in; or a reportable event (arrest, being taken into custody, charged/convicted of an offence, being a victim of domestic violence, or a domestic violence order made against the person) (r 15(1)). They must notify as soon as practicable of: a diagnosis or significant health deterioration; any other event that has or may have significant impact on the child’s wellbeing; or suspicion of illegal activity (r 15(2)). They must give any information about the child that the CEO reasonably requests within a reasonable time (r 16). And on placement ending they must return the child’s property and personal items to the child or CEO as soon as practicable (r 17). These responsibilities create continuous compliance obligations that extend beyond the carer’s household to include co‑residents’ criminal and domestic violence histories.

The Regulations directly affect three groups: individuals who wish to or are asked to become carers for children under the care and protection system; the CEO and presumably departmental officers who administer the approval, review and revocation processes; and children placed under placement arrangements. Secondarily they affect mature persons who reside with a carer or nominee, because those persons must be assessed as fit and proper and must consent to release of their criminal history to the CEO (rr 3(e), 4(2)(d), 7(b)(iii), 10(1)(e)(ii)). They also affect professionals involved in care and protection who may nominate individuals , e.g., child protection workers, non‑government organisations, foster care agencies (r 4(1) allows nomination by “a person involved in the care and protection of children”).

Authorised carers bear the heaviest regulatory burden. They must hold a clearance notice (r 3(a)), provide character references (r 4(2)(c)), consent to release of medical information (r 4(2)(b)), and ensure co‑resident mature persons consent to criminal history release (r 4(2)(d)). Their conduct is subject to continuous review by the CEO at any time (r 7), and they must comply with information requests on pain of revocation (r 8(3)(a)). They must attend training or information sessions as directed by the CEO (r 13(j)). They must report a wide range of personal and household events immediately or as soon as practicable, including their own arrest, charge, conviction, being a victim of domestic violence, or a domestic violence order (r 15(3)). This creates a significant privacy cost and ongoing administrative burden.

Emergency carers face a lighter entry barrier , no clearance notice required , but their approval is temporary and tied to a specific child. They still must fit the CEO’s fit and proper assessment based on any matter the CEO considers relevant, must consent to criminal history release, and must ensure co‑resident mature persons also consent. They also bear the full Part 4 responsibilities for the short placement duration (r 12). The practical effect is that emergency carers are likely to be relatives, neighbours or other persons known to the child who can be quickly approved, but they have limited time to adjust to the regulatory obligations.

Children are the intended beneficiaries, but the Regulations impose no enforceable procedural rights on children. The CEO must believe placement with an emergency carer is in the child’s best interests (r 10(1)(b)), but there is no requirement for the child’s views to be sought or considered in the Regulations. The responsibilities of the carer around development, cultural identity, and medical attention are owed to the child but are enforceable only through the CEO’s power to revoke approval. The child cannot enforce these duties directly.

The CEO (and the department) must manage the administrative load: processing nominations, seeking information, making eligibility decisions, setting conditions, conducting reviews, and issuing revocation notices. There is no timeframe in the Regulations for the CEO to decide a nomination beyond “as soon as practicable” (r 5(4)). The CEO can effectively stall or refuse to consider a nomination if the nominee does not respond within a “reasonable time” (r 5(3)). The Regulations grant wide information‑gathering powers without cost constraints on the CEO’s inquiries.

Carer duties are concentrated in Part 4. Regulation 13 imposes ten specific duties: show interest and respect for the child; provide a safe, caring and stable environment; provide appropriate accommodation; provide material requirements; ensure medical attention; encourage the child’s development; ensure school attendance if enrolled; assist the child to maintain personal, familial and cultural identity; comply with and assist with the care plan; and attend training as directed. These duties are not qualified by reasonableness or practicality , they are absolute in form.

Notification duties are extensive and immediate. Under r 15(1) the carer must notify the CEO immediately of death, serious injury, absconding, abduction, harm or threat of harm, loss of clearance notice, inability to meet responsibilities, a new mature resident moving in, or a reportable event. “Immediately” is a high standard and could be breached by even a short delay. Under r 15(2) the carer must notify as soon as practicable of health deterioration, any event with significant impact on the child’s wellbeing, or suspicion of illegal activity. These duties apply regardless of whether the carer believes the information is already known to the department.

The carer must also give any information about the child that the CEO reasonably requests within a reasonable time (r 16). This gives the CEO a broad, ongoing right to demand information without a specified limit.

On placement ending, the carer must return the child’s property and personal items as soon as practicable (r 17).

Carer rights are minimal. The right to be notified of a decision and reasons if approval is refused (r 5(4)(c)), but no right to a hearing, a merits review, or an appeal under these Regulations. The right to be notified of revocation and the reason (r 8(4)(a)), but no opportunity to show cause before revocation takes effect (revocation takes effect when notice is given: r 8(4)(b)). There is no requirement for the CEO to give the carer a chance to remedy a breach before revoking under r 8(3)(b). The carer has a right to nominate themselves (r 4(1)) and to have the nomination considered, but the CEO can refuse to consider it if the carer does not comply with information requests within a reasonable time (r 5(3)). There is no right to an extension of the two‑year term; renewal requires a new nomination and approval process.

Child rights are not directly conferred by the Regulations. The duties under r 13 are obligations owed to the CEO as a matter of regulatory compliance, not enforceable private law rights. A child cannot sue for breach of duty under the Regulations. The Act’s objects and principles are referenced (r 3(d), r 9(c)) but not made justiciable in favour of the child.

Mature resident rights are virtually nil. They must consent to release of criminal history, but they have no right to be heard on the CEO’s assessment of their fitness. The CEO’s satisfaction is subjective. If the CEO is dissatisfied, the nominee or carer may be rejected or revoked, but the mature resident has no separate right of review.

The Regulations themselves do not create any direct offences or pecuniary penalties. They operate as subordinate legislation under the Care and Protection of Children Act 2007. Enforcement occurs through the CEO’s administrative powers: refusal of nomination, revocation of approval (including automatic revocation for loss of clearance notice), and potentially through the Act’s own enforcement provisions.

Regulation 8(2) provides that the CEO must revoke approval if the individual otherwise ceases to be eligible. Regulation 8(3) gives the CEO a discretionary power to revoke for non‑compliance with a regulation 7 information requirement or for failure to meet a Part 4 responsibility. There is no warning or cure period specified. The revocation takes effect immediately on notice (r 8(4)(b)). The carer has no statutory right to challenge the revocation before it takes effect.

The practical consequences of revocation are serious. The carer loses the ability to have the child placed with them and must return the child’s property and personal items under r 17. The carer will also likely be removed from the department’s pool of carers. There is no provision for temporary suspension pending review; revocation is final.

There is a notable gap: the Regulations do not provide for any monitoring or inspection powers for the CEO to verify compliance with Part 4 duties (e.g., whether accommodation is “appropriate” or the environment is “safe, caring and stable”). The CEO must rely on information requests under r 7 and r 16 and the carer’s self‑reporting obligations. The reporting obligations under r 15 effectively require the carer to self‑incriminate , if the carer fails to report an event that constitutes a breach (e.g., the child suffers a serious injury due to the carer’s neglect), the failure to notify is itself a breach of r 15(1)(a) or (b) and may trigger revocation.

The Regulations also do not create any independent oversight body. The CEO is the sole gatekeeper and enforcer. There is no provision for the child, the child’s family, or a guardian ad litem to trigger a review of the carer’s approval.

There is an indirect link to the Act’s criminal penalties. If a carer places a child without a valid placement arrangement (or without being an approved carer), that would likely contravene the Act. The Regulations do not create safe harbours or defences; they merely define who is an approved carer.

The Regulations are made under the Care and Protection of Children Act 2007 (NT) and sit within that Act’s framework. They implement the placement arrangement provisions of the Act, particularly section 78(1)(a) which refers to carers. The Regulations define who can be a carer and what duties they have, but the Act governs the ultimate care and protection orders, parental responsibility, and the circumstances under which a child is placed.

The “clearance notice” requirement links to the Care and Protection of Children (Clearance Notices) Regulations or the Act’s provisions on clearance. An authorised carer must hold a current clearance notice (r 3(a)), and revocation is automatic if the notice ceases (r 8(1)). This ties the carer regime to the separate clearance system.

The definition of “reportable event” in r 15(3) incorporates the Domestic and Family Violence Act 2007 (NT) for the definition of domestic violence and domestic violence order. It also references the Police Administration Act 1978 (NT) section 128 (apprehension and custody without warrant). This means that a carer’s or co‑resident’s involvement with the criminal justice system or domestic violence system triggers mandatory immediate reporting.

The Regulations interact with the Act’s care plan requirements. The carer must comply with and assist implementation of the care plan (r 13(i)). The care plan is a document prepared under the Act. If the care plan changes, the carer’s duties may also change without any amendment to the Regulations.

The Regulations do not interact with any federal laws such as the Family Law Act 1975. They are a Northern Territory instrument.

The version provided is the Regulations as in force at 1 September 2010. The endnotes indicate the Regulations were notified and commenced on 1 September 2010 (SL No. 19, 2010). The endnotes also note that general amendments of a formal nature (not referred to in the table of amendments) were made by the Interpretation Legislation Amendment Act 2018 (Act No. 22 of 2018) to regulations 1 and 15. That means that after the version provided, formal amendments were made to the citation and notification provisions, likely to update language or references (e.g., “citation” may have been amended to reflect standard drafting conventions, and regulation 15 may have had its notification requirements updated for consistency with the Amendment Act). The precise content of those amendments is not shown in the source. No other amendments are recorded.

The Regulations appear to have been made as a new instrument in 2010, presumably to replace earlier placement arrangement regulations or to implement the 2007 Act which came into force earlier. The source does not give history of predecessor instruments.

The source does not cite any cases, and a careful reading reveals no provisions that have been litigated. There are no references to court decisions, no definitions that draw on case law, and no sections that delegate interpretive authority to courts. Given that these are regulations made by the Administrator in Council, any litigation would likely arise under the parent Act, not the Regulations themselves. The broad discretionary powers granted to the CEO could be subject to judicial review on administrative law grounds (e.g., reasonableness, natural justice), but the Regulations deliberately limit procedural safeguards , for example, the CEO is not required to give the carer a hearing before revoking approval. If a carer challenged a revocation, the court would likely consider whether the CEO acted within power and whether the carer had a legitimate expectation of procedural fairness. The Regulations themselves provide no internal review mechanism, so any challenge would have to be to the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory under the Judicial Review Act or common law. There is no indication in the source of any such litigation having occurred.

Automatic revocation on loss of clearance notice. Under r 8(1), the approval of an authorised carer is revoked on the date the individual ceases to hold a clearance notice that is in force, “as if the CEO had revoked the approval under subregulation (2).” This happens automatically and immediately , the CEO does not need to take any action, and there is no grace period. If the carer’s clearance notice expires or is suspended for any reason, the carer status is lost instantly. The carer must notify the CEO immediately if they cease to hold a clearance notice (r 15(1)(d)), but the revocation occurs regardless of notification.

Immediate revocation and no cure period. Under r 8(3)(b), the CEO may revoke approval if the carer fails to meet a responsibility in Part 4. There is no requirement for a warning or a reasonable time to remedy the breach. The CEO can revoke on the first breach, however minor, as long as it is a failure to meet a responsibility. For example, if the carer fails to attend a training session as directed (r 13(j)), the CEO could revoke immediately.

“Fit and proper” test based on any matter the CEO considers relevant. For authorised carers, the fit and proper test in r 3(c) includes a catch‑all: “any other matter the CEO considers relevant.” For emergency carers, the fit and proper test in r 9(b) is only based on “any matter the CEO considers relevant” , there is no list of factors at all. This gives the CEO unlimited discretion to decide who is fit and proper. The CEO could consider matters unrelated to caring for children, such as the individual’s political views, social media activity, or personal relationships, and still be within power.

Mature resident criminal history disclosure. For authorised carers, the CEO requires the consent of each mature person residing with the nominee for release of criminal history (r 4(2)(d)). But for emergency carers, the CEO needs the consent of each mature resident for criminal history release before approving (r 10(1)(e)(ii)). There is an important difference: authorised carer nomination requires the consent upfront; emergency carer approval requires the CEO to receive the consents before approving. If a mature resident refuses to consent, the individual cannot become an emergency carer at all, and for authorised carer nomination, the CEO may refuse to consider the nomination if the nominee does not comply with a requirement (r 5(3)), which likely includes obtaining the consent.

Emergency carer approval lasts only 3 days maximum. The approval is in force from the time the child is placed until midnight 3 days after placement (r 11(1)(a)). That is a very short window. If the child remains in placement after that, the carer is no longer an approved emergency carer. The only extension path is if the individual is nominated to be an authorised carer under r 4 before that date, in which case the emergency approval lasts until the CEO’s decision on that nomination (r 11(1)(b)). This creates a pressure: the CEO and carers must either find an authorised carer within 3 days or the child must be moved. There is no built‑in power to extend the emergency approval for, say, administrative delay.

Reporting obligations for co‑residents’ reportable events. The carer must immediately notify the CEO if a reportable event happens “in relation to the carer or a person who resides with the carer” (r 15(1)(g)). That means the carer has a duty to report if a co‑resident adult is arrested, charged, convicted, is a victim of domestic violence, or has a domestic violence order made against them. This casts a wide net and could put the carer in a difficult position with co‑residents who might not want that information disclosed.

No obligation on CEO to act on notification. The Regulations require the carer to report events, but they do not require the CEO to take any particular action on receiving the report. The CEO could receive information about a serious incident and decide to do nothing. There is no specified timeframe for the CEO to respond or to review the carer’s approval.

“As soon as practicable” for information requests. The CEO may request information about the child under r 16, and the carer must give it “within a reasonable time.” If the carer delays, the CEO could treat that as a failure to meet a responsibility and revoke under r 8(3)(b). What constitutes a reasonable time is not defined, creating uncertainty.

For an individual seeking to become an authorised carer, compliance involves several steps. First, obtain a current clearance notice under the Act. That is a non‑negotiable requirement (r 3(a)). Second, obtain a character reference from someone who has known the individual for at least 12 months (r 4(2)(c)). Third, provide consent for the CEO to access medical information in the form required (r 4(2)(b)). Fourth, ensure each mature person who resides with the individual consents to the Commissioner of Police releasing their criminal history to the CEO (r 4(2)(d)). Fifth, complete the nomination in the approved form (r 4(2)). The nominee should also be prepared to respond to any further information requests from the CEO within a reasonable time, as the CEO may refuse to consider the nomination if there is non‑compliance (r 5(3)).

Once approved, the carer must comply with all Part 4 responsibilities. Practically, this means keeping the child’s environment safe and stable, providing appropriate accommodation and material needs, ensuring medical care is obtained, encouraging the child’s development, assisting with cultural identity, and ensuring school attendance if enrolled. The carer should maintain a close working relationship with the department to implement the care plan (r 13(i)). The carer must attend any training or information sessions directed by the CEO (r 13(j)). A failure to attend could be treated as a breach.

The notification regime is critical. The carer must set up a system to immediately report: any death or serious injury of the child; the child absconding or being abducted; the child harming or threatening harm; the carer losing their clearance notice; the carer becoming unable or unwilling to meet responsibilities; any new mature person moving into the residence; and any reportable event involving the carer or a resident. “Immediately” means without delay , the carer should have the CEO’s contact details readily available. For less urgent matters (health deterioration, other significant events, suspicion of illegal activity), notification must occur as soon as practicable, which still requires prompt action. The carer should keep records of all notifications.

The carer must also notify the CEO immediately of any change of residential address or other contact details (r 14). This seems straightforward but can be overlooked during a move.

If the placement ends, the carer must return any of the child’s property or personal items left with them as soon as practicable (r 17). This includes items defined in the Act s 86(6). The carer should not hold onto items for any reason.

The carer should be aware that the CEO may review their approval at any time (r 7). The CEO may demand further information or consents, and the carer must comply within a reasonable time. If the carer receives such a request, they should respond promptly and provide the consents if needed. Failure to do so may lead to revocation (r 8(3)(a)).

For individuals who become emergency carers, the requirements are lighter at the point of entry but equally onerous during the placement. The carer must ensure that the CEO receives criminal history consents from the carer and each mature resident before approval (r 10(1)(e)). The carer must also meet the Part 4 responsibilities for the short placement. The biggest compliance risk is the 3‑day time limit , the carer needs to work with the department to either have the child moved to an authorised carer or start the nomination process for themselves to become an authorised carer. The carer should not assume the placement can continue past 3 days without a valid approval.

There is no standard form or checklist provided in the Regulations. Compliance is best achieved by maintaining open communication with the departmental caseworker, keeping written records of all notifications and requests, and seeking clarification from the CEO if any responsibility is ambiguous. Given the CEO’s broad discretion, proactive compliance and cooperation are the carer’s main protections against revocation.