CDF v Wesley Dalmar, CLE v Children’s Guardian [2016] NSWCATAD 187

CDF v Wesley Dalmar, CLE v Children’s Guardian [2016] NSWCATAD 187

The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over both applications. Wesley Dalmar did not make a reviewable decision to suspend Mrs C's authorisation because the suspension occurred automatically under clause 42D of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Regulation 2012 while Mr C resided in the same home. For Mr C, the cancellation decision was made in September 2015 and any review application was outside the 28 day period, while the subsequent dismissal of charges did not revive the clearance. The only current reviewable decision was the interim bar imposed on 15 April 2016, but review was unavailable because it had not been in force for more than 6 months.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review Applications / Preliminary Issue as to Jurisdiction Determined on the Papers
Outcome
Both applications dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
['reviewable Decisions' 'tribunal Jurisdiction' 'interim Bar' 'cancellation of Working With Children Check Clearance' 'automatic Suspension of Authorised Carer Authorisation' 'automatic Cancellation of Authorised Carer Authorisation']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection' 'working With Children Checks' 'out of Home Care'] ['reviewable Decisions' 'tribunal Jurisdiction' 'interim Bar' 'cancellation of Working With Children Check Clearance' 'automatic Suspension of Authorised Carer Authorisation' 'automatic Cancellation of Authorised Carer Authorisation']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review Applications / Preliminary Issue as to Jurisdiction Determined on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Wesley Dalmar made a reviewable decision to suspend Mrs C's authorisation as an authorised carer or whether the suspension occurred by operation of law under clause 42D of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Regulation 2012." "Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the Children's Guardian's cancellation of Mr C's working with children check clearance." "Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the Children's Guardian's decision to impose an interim bar on Mr C before the interim bar had been in force for more than 6 months."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over both applications. Wesley Dalmar did not make a reviewable decision to suspend Mrs C's authorisation because the suspension occurred automatically under clause 42D of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Regulation 2012 while Mr C resided in the same home. For Mr C, the cancellation decision was made in September 2015 and any review application was outside the 28 day period, while the subsequent dismissal of charges did not revive the clearance. The only current reviewable decision was the interim bar imposed on 15 April 2016, but review was unavailable because it had not been in force for more than 6 months.

Court Disposition

Both applications dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • ['The application of CDF is dismissed.' 'The application of CLE is dismissed.']