BQF v Children’s Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 225

BQF v Children’s Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 225

The Tribunal refused the enabling orders because the disqualifying offence was very serious, the applicant continued more than 40 years later to deny, minimise and blame the 12-year-old victim, showed no genuine remorse, had not accepted responsibility, had alcohol-related offending and continuing alcohol and cannabis use, had not obtained relevant treatment, and the Tribunal did not accept Dr Hinton's opinion that the risk of sexual re-offending was low. The applicant did not overcome the presumption in subsection 28(7) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 that he poses a risk to the safety of children.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Enabling Orders in Relation to a Working With Children Check Clearance / Decision on Application to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales
Outcome
Application refused and dismissed; publication restriction made.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualified Person' 'enabling Order' 'risk to Safety of Children' 'publication Restriction']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualified Person' 'enabling Order' 'risk to Safety of Children' 'publication Restriction']

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 Orders in Relation to a Working With Children Check Clearance / Decision on Application to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal should make an enabling order declaring that the applicant is not to be treated as a disqualified person for the purposes of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 in respect of his 1974 conviction.' 'Whether the applicant overcame the statutory presumption that he poses a risk to the safety of children.' 'Whether broadcast or publication of identifying information should be prohibited.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal refused the enabling orders because the disqualifying offence was very serious, the applicant continued more than 40 years later to deny, minimise and blame the 12-year-old victim, showed no genuine remorse, had not accepted responsibility, had alcohol-related offending and continuing alcohol and cannabis use, had not obtained relevant treatment, and the Tribunal did not accept Dr Hinton's opinion that the risk of sexual re-offending was low. The applicant did not overcome the presumption in subsection 28(7) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 that he poses a risk to the safety of children.

Court Disposition

Application refused and dismissed; publication restriction made.

Orders

  • ['The Application of the Applicant for enabling orders is refused.' 'The application of 22 December 2014 is otherwise dismissed.' 'Broadcast or publication of the name or other identifying information of the Applicant, his wife or any victim of any offence of the Applicant referred to in these reasons is prohibited.']