BPA v Children’s Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 36

BPA v Children’s Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 36

The applicant's history of domestic violence and aggression, insufficient demonstrated insight into his offending and the impact on children, and lack of offence-focused counselling support a finding that he poses a risk to the safety of children. Therefore, the decision to refuse the working with children check clearance was the correct and preferable decision and is affirmed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Final Merits Hearing and Determination
Outcome
Decision of the respondent is affirmed.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check' 'risk Assessment' 'domestic Violence' 'administrative Review' 'clearances for Child Related Work']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check' 'risk Assessment' 'domestic Violence' 'administrative Review' 'clearances for Child Related Work']

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 / Final Merits Hearing and Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the decision to refuse a working with children check clearance should be affirmed' 'Whether the applicant poses a risk to the safety of children under the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's history of domestic violence and aggression, insufficient demonstrated insight into his offending and the impact on children, and lack of offence-focused counselling support a finding that he poses a risk to the safety of children. Therefore, the decision to refuse the working with children check clearance was the correct and preferable decision and is affirmed.

Court Disposition

Decision of the respondent is affirmed.

Orders

  • ["Decision of the Children's Guardian to refuse the applicant's application for a working with children check clearance is affirmed."]