BQE v Children’s Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 89

BQE v Children’s Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 89

The Tribunal found that, while the applicant had not been convicted of relevant offences, there was sufficient evidence that he engaged in conduct on two occasions (1997 and February 2011) that could cause psychological harm and posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children, and that he failed to discharge the forensic burden of substantiating his medical explanation. Therefore, the refusal to grant a Working with Children Check Clearance was affirmed.

Parties
Applicant: BQE; Respondent: Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Final Decision
Outcome
Application for review refused and dismissed. Children's Guardian's decision affirmed.
Legal Topics
Working With Children Check, Risk Assessment, Onus of Proof, Procedural Fairness
Administrative Law Child Protection Equal Opportunity Working With Children Check Risk Assessment Onus of Proof Procedural Fairness

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BQE

Applicant

Children's Guardian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children
  2. 2 Whether the applicant discharged the forensic burden regarding his explanation for conduct
  3. 3 Whether sufficient evidence supports the applicant’s claims

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that, while the applicant had not been convicted of relevant offences, there was sufficient evidence that he engaged in conduct on two occasions (1997 and February 2011) that could cause psychological harm and posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children, and that he failed to discharge the forensic burden of substantiating his medical explanation. Therefore, the refusal to grant a Working with Children Check Clearance was affirmed.

Court Disposition

Application for review refused and dismissed. Children's Guardian's decision affirmed.

Orders

  • The decision of the Children's Guardian dated 2 October 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 on 22 December 2014 is otherwise refused and dismissed.