CKU v Children’s Guardian [2024] NSWCATAD 376

CKU v Children’s Guardian [2024] NSWCATAD 376

The Tribunal was not satisfied on the evidence that CKU currently poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. No positive findings could be made on the allegations, and there is no criminal record or adverse conduct since the time of the allegations. Expert evidence supports a finding of low risk. A reasonable person, properly informed, would allow unsupervised contact, and it is in the public interest to grant the clearance. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the respondent's decision and ordered that a clearance be granted.

Parties
Applicant: CKU; Respondent: Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Merits Review; Final Decision
Outcome
Applicant succeeds; decision set aside; clearance to be granted
Legal Topics
Working With Children Check, Risk Assessment, Merits Review, Public Interest, Protective Jurisdiction
Administrative Law Child Protection Working With Children Check Risk Assessment Merits Review Public Interest Protective Jurisdiction

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 6 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CKU

Applicant

Children's Guardian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review / Merits Review; Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CKU poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children if a Working With Children Check Clearance is granted
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal should set aside the Children's Guardian's refusal of clearance
  3. 3 Whether a reasonable person would allow their child to have unsupervised contact with CKU in child-related work

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was not satisfied on the evidence that CKU currently poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. No positive findings could be made on the allegations, and there is no criminal record or adverse conduct since the time of the allegations. Expert evidence supports a finding of low risk. A reasonable person, properly informed, would allow unsupervised contact, and it is in the public interest to grant the clearance. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the respondent's decision and ordered that a clearance be granted.

Court Disposition

Applicant succeeds; decision set aside; clearance to be granted

Orders

  • The decision of the respondent dated 13 December 2023 to refuse the applicant's Working With Children Check Clearance is set aside.
  • The respondent is to grant the applicant a Working With Children Check Clearance.