CCX v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 64

CCX v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 64

Although the applicant's four common assault convictions in a domestic violence context were serious and two incidents occurred in the presence of children, the individual assaults were at the lower end of seriousness, the applicant had not been violent since June 2014, had stopped drinking alcohol, had engaged with counselling and psychological services, had developed strategies to manage anger, and had behaved positively and supportively towards his granddaughters. The Tribunal was not satisfied that alleged inconsistencies or disclosure issues showed deliberate falsehoods or increased risk. Applying the statutory factors, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant posed a real...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Refusal of Working With Children Check Clearance / Tribunal Review of Children's Guardian's Decision
Outcome
The Children's Guardian's refusal decision was set aside and a working with children check clearance was granted to the applicant.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'domestic Violence Offences' 'protective Jurisdiction' 'review of Administrative Decision']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'domestic Violence Offences' 'protective Jurisdiction' 'review of Administrative Decision']

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 of Refusal of Working With Children Check Clearance / Tribunal Review of Children's Guardian's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the correct and preferable decision was to refuse or grant the applicant a working with children check clearance.' 'Whether the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children within the meaning of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW).' "How the Tribunal should apply the factors in s 30(1) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW) to the applicant's assault convictions, conduct since offending, counselling, alcohol abstinence and care of his granddaughters." 'Whether alleged failures of disclosure or alleged untruthfulness by the applicant affected the assessment of risk.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicant's four common assault convictions in a domestic violence context were serious and two incidents occurred in the presence of children, the individual assaults were at the lower end of seriousness, the applicant had not been violent since June 2014, had stopped drinking alcohol, had engaged with counselling and psychological services, had developed strategies to manage anger, and had behaved positively and supportively towards his granddaughters. The Tribunal was not satisfied that alleged inconsistencies or disclosure issues showed deliberate falsehoods or increased risk. Applying the statutory factors, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant posed a real...

Court Disposition

The Children's Guardian's refusal decision was set aside and a working with children check clearance was granted to the applicant.

Orders

  • ["The decision of the Children's Guardian to refuse the applicant a working with children check clearance is set aside." 'In substitution for that decision, the Tribunal decides to grant the applicant a working with children check clearance.']