BMO v Children's Guardian [2014] NSWCATAD 226

BMO v Children's Guardian [2014] NSWCATAD 226

The applicant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that he does not pose a risk to the safety of children, having insufficient insight into the effects of his violent offending conduct; thus, the statutory presumption under subsection 28(7) of the Act was not rebutted. The application for an enabling order is refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Enabling Order Under Administrative Law / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Application for enabling order refused
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'enabling Order' 'disqualified Person' 'statutory Presumption' 'domestic Violence' 'criminal History Assessment']

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

Application for Enabling Order Under Administrative Law / Final Decision After Hearing

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant has discharged the onus to rebut the statutory presumption under subsection 28(7) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 that he poses a risk to the safety of children']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that he does not pose a risk to the safety of children, having insufficient insight into the effects of his violent offending conduct; thus, the statutory presumption under subsection 28(7) of the Act was not rebutted. The application for an enabling order is refused.

Court Disposition

Application for enabling order refused

Orders

  • ["The applicant's application for an enabling order is refused."]