Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Delimiting Detention

Bibliographic Data

ID6174033
AuthorsEsther Erlings (0000-0002-9346-5290, corresponding author), Laura Grenfell (0000-0001-6172-6719)
Year2025
Volume48
Issue2
Publication date2025-07-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueUniversity of New South Wales Law Journal (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0313-0096 • E-ISSN: 1839-2881
PublisherUniversity of New South Wales Law Journal (PUBLISHER • AU)
DOI10.53637/zdsa5853
OpenAlexW7108227686
LanguageEN

The detention of persons in residential care in Australia has received little recognition. Given also the absence of human rights frameworks in most Australian jurisdictions, it has been argued that Australian governments resist the idea of deprivation of liberty in social care settings. However, the South Australian case of Public Advocate v C, B (‘Public Advocate Case’) may signal a turning point. This article analyses developments in South Australia and nationally to consider whether Australia is resisting social care detention and associated deprivation of liberty. It engages with the complex legal landscape, covering federal-state care schemes, tort law, guardianship and human rights law, and makes two main arguments: first, that the Public Advocate Case can be read as a formative step in recognising social care detention in Australia; and, second, that subsequent developments leave care providers at risk of liability, and care receivers without the full protection of their human rights

Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae