BPX v Children’s Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 114

BPX v Children’s Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 114

On the balance of probabilities, and having regard to the seriousness of the allegations, the Tribunal was comfortably satisfied that the events alleged against the applicant occurred. The conduct involved abuse of a position of trust towards a vulnerable person, was serious, and was accompanied by an earlier inappropriate incident involving a child. Because the applicant maintained denial, lacked sufficient insight, and had not shown sustained positive effort to address the conduct, the Tribunal could not be satisfied that he did not pose a real and appreciable risk to children. The correct and preferable decision was therefore to affirm the Children's Guardian's refusal of a Working...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review Under Section 27 of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) of Refusal to Grant a Working With Children Check Clearance / Final Hearing and Reasons for Decision
Outcome
Decision affirmed; application for review refused and dismissed.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'refusal of Clearance' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'sexual Misconduct Allegations' 'administrative Review' 'onus and Standard of Proof']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'refusal of Clearance' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'sexual Misconduct Allegations' 'administrative Review' 'onus and Standard of Proof']

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 Under Section 27 of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) of Refusal to Grant a Working With Children Check Clearance / Final Hearing and Reasons for Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What the correct and preferable decision is having regard to the material before the Tribunal.' 'Whether the applicant poses a risk to the safety of children if granted a Working with Children Check clearance.' "What weight should be given to the applicant's acquittal on criminal charges and to the previous clearance under repealed legislation." 'Whether the alleged conduct was established on the civil standard and whether it indicated a real and appreciable risk to children.']

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities, and having regard to the seriousness of the allegations, the Tribunal was comfortably satisfied that the events alleged against the applicant occurred. The conduct involved abuse of a position of trust towards a vulnerable person, was serious, and was accompanied by an earlier inappropriate incident involving a child. Because the applicant maintained denial, lacked sufficient insight, and had not shown sustained positive effort to address the conduct, the Tribunal could not be satisfied that he did not pose a real and appreciable risk to children. The correct and preferable decision was therefore to affirm the Children's Guardian's refusal of a Working...

Court Disposition

Decision affirmed; application for review refused and dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The decision of the Children's Guardian dated 5 December 2014 to refuse to grant the applicant a Working with Children Check clearance is affirmed." "The application for review of the decision of the Children's Guardian filed 11 December 2014 is otherwise refused and dismissed."]