BRT v Children's Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 272

BRT v Children's Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 272

On the balance of probabilities, the applicant was found to have engaged in aggravated indecent assault of a child while in a position of authority, failed to demonstrate sufficient insight or mitigating factors, and poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children; therefore, the refusal of a Working with Children Check clearance is affirmed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Review / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Refusal affirmed; application for review dismissed
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check' 'risk Assessment' 'tribunal Review' 'child Abuse Protection']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection' 'equal Opportunity'] ['working With Children Check' 'risk Assessment' 'tribunal Review' 'child Abuse Protection']

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 Law Review / Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children' 'Whether the refusal of Working with Children Check clearance should be affirmed']

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities, the applicant was found to have engaged in aggravated indecent assault of a child while in a position of authority, failed to demonstrate sufficient insight or mitigating factors, and poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children; therefore, the refusal of a Working with Children Check clearance is affirmed.

Court Disposition

Refusal affirmed; application for review dismissed

Orders

  • ["The decision of the Children's Guardian dated 15 January 2015 to refuse to grant the applicant a Working with Children Check clearance is affirmed." 'The application for review filed 25 February 2015 is otherwise refused and dismissed.']