CKJ v Children’s Guardian [2018] NSWCATAD 117

CKJ v Children’s Guardian [2018] NSWCATAD 117

The Tribunal found that the investigation report underlying the cancellation was unreliable and not sustained on the balance of probabilities. Given credible evidence from the applicant and expert psychological opinion finding her risk to children as low, and with no adverse findings since the alleged incidents, the Tribunal was not satisfied the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to children. The necessary requirements of s 30(1A) of the WWC Act were met: a reasonable person would allow supervised contact, and it was in the public interest to restore the applicant's clearance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Final Decision
Outcome
The respondent's decision to cancel the applicant's working with children check clearance is set aside. In its place, the applicant is granted a working with children check clearance.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check' 'risk Assessment' 'cancellation of Clearance' 'administrative Review' 'paramountcy of Child Safety']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection' 'equal Opportunity'] ['working With Children Check' 'risk Assessment' 'cancellation of Clearance' 'administrative Review' 'paramountcy of Child Safety']

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 / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children warranting cancellation of her Working With Children Check clearance' 'Whether the allegations made against the applicant were established on the balance of probabilities' 'Whether a reasonable person would allow their child direct contact with the applicant in child-related work' 'Whether it is in the public interest to grant the applicant a working with children check clearance']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the investigation report underlying the cancellation was unreliable and not sustained on the balance of probabilities. Given credible evidence from the applicant and expert psychological opinion finding her risk to children as low, and with no adverse findings since the alleged incidents, the Tribunal was not satisfied the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to children. The necessary requirements of s 30(1A) of the WWC Act were met: a reasonable person would allow supervised contact, and it was in the public interest to restore the applicant's clearance.

Court Disposition

The respondent's decision to cancel the applicant's working with children check clearance is set aside. In its place, the applicant is granted a working with children check clearance.

Orders

  • ["The respondent's decision made on 30 September 2016 to cancel the applicant's working with children check clearance is set aside." 'In substitution for that decision a decision is made to grant the applicant a working with children check clearance.']