BVT v Children’s Guardian (No. 4) [2018] NSWCATAD 153

BVT v Children’s Guardian (No. 4) [2018] NSWCATAD 153

The applicant rebutted the statutory presumption that he poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. The Tribunal placed particular weight on the forensic psychologist's evidence that the risk he presents to children's safety is commensurate with that of any adult member of the community and that his risk of future sexual offending is low; the unsubstantiated nature of allegations concerning physical discipline of C; the 45 years since the index offence committed when he was an intoxicated youth; his extended period of non-offending; his long-term stable relationship; and his sobriety for more than 10 years. Accordingly, he should not be treated as a disqualified person...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for an Enabling Order Under Section 28 of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) Following Refusal of a Working With Children Check Clearance / Determination After Remittal by the Supreme Court of NSW
Outcome
Application granted; the applicant is not to be treated as a disqualified person and the Children's Guardian is to grant a working with children check clearance.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualified Person' 'disqualifying Offence' 'statutory Presumption of Risk to Safety of Children' 'enabling Order' 'suppression Order']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualified Person' 'disqualifying Offence' 'statutory Presumption of Risk to Safety of Children' 'enabling Order' 'suppression Order']

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 an Enabling Order Under Section 28 of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) Following Refusal of a Working With Children Check Clearance / Determination After Remittal by the Supreme Court of NSW

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant rebutted the statutory presumption under section 28(7) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW) that he poses a risk to the safety of children.' 'Whether the applicant should be treated as a disqualified person by reason of his 1973 conviction for assault with intent to rape.' "Whether the Children's Guardian should be ordered to grant the applicant a working with children check clearance."]

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant rebutted the statutory presumption that he poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. The Tribunal placed particular weight on the forensic psychologist's evidence that the risk he presents to children's safety is commensurate with that of any adult member of the community and that his risk of future sexual offending is low; the unsubstantiated nature of allegations concerning physical discipline of C; the 45 years since the index offence committed when he was an intoxicated youth; his extended period of non-offending; his long-term stable relationship; and his sobriety for more than 10 years. Accordingly, he should not be treated as a disqualified person...

Court Disposition

Application granted; the applicant is not to be treated as a disqualified person and the Children's Guardian is to grant a working with children check clearance.

Orders

  • ['The applicant is not to be treated as a disqualified person for the offence of assault with intent to rape in 1973 under the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).' "The applicant's application for an enabling order is granted." "Pursuant to s.28(6) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012, the Children's Guardian...