CKY v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 28

CKY v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 28

Although the Tribunal did not find on the balance of probabilities that the alleged 2000 offending occurred, it did not accept that the allegations were fabricated or groundless and found a lingering doubt or suspicion about the applicant's conduct. Having regard to the seriousness of the allegations, the...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Refusal of Application for a Working With Children Check Clearance / Final Determination After Hearing
Outcome
Application for review dismissed in substance; respondent's decision affirmed after extension of time granted.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'external Review' 'extension of Time']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'external Review' 'extension of Time']

Source-derived case record

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 Application for a Working With Children Check Clearance / Final Determination After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended for the applicant to lodge his application for review to 9 February 2016.' 'Whether the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children for the purposes of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW).' 'Whether the circumstances surrounding alleged offences involving a child, despite acquittal, gave rise to a continuing risk to the safety of children at the date of hearing.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Tribunal did not find on the balance of probabilities that the alleged 2000 offending occurred, it did not accept that the allegations were fabricated or groundless and found a lingering doubt or suspicion about the applicant's conduct. Having regard to the seriousness of the allegations, the applicant's position of trust, ongoing reports to police of alleged assault, sexual assault and stalking, his lack of insight into child protection issues, and the paramount consideration of protecting children, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. The correct and preferable decision was therefore to affirm the refusal...

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed in substance; respondent's decision affirmed after extension of time granted.

Orders

  • ['Time is extended within which the applicant is to lodge his application to 9 February 2016.' "The decision of the respondent, made on 6 January 2016, to refuse the applicant's application for a working with children check clearance is affirmed."]