CLH v Children's Guardian [2016] NSWCATAD 142

CLH v Children's Guardian [2016] NSWCATAD 142

Although the applicant's juvenile violent offending was serious, the Tribunal found that six years had passed without further charges or convictions, the offences were committed as a juvenile against peers, the applicant had matured, undertaken counselling and treatment, shown insight and remorse, and the psychological evidence assessed his risk of violent recidivism as low. Considering the section 30(1) factors and the paramount need to protect children, the Tribunal was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the applicant did not pose a real and appreciable risk of harm to children, so the correct and preferable decision was to grant the clearance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of a Decision Refusing a Working With Children Check Clearance Under Section 27 of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
The Children's Guardian's decision to refuse the Working with Children Check clearance was set aside and the respondent was directed to grant the clearance.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'common Assault as Juvenile' 'protective Jurisdiction' 'correct and Preferable Decision']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'common Assault as Juvenile' 'protective Jurisdiction' 'correct and Preferable 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 a Decision Refusing a Working With Children Check Clearance Under Section 27 of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) / Final Decision After Hearing

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 of harm to children having regard to the matters in section 30(1) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicant's juvenile violent offending was serious, the Tribunal found that six years had passed without further charges or convictions, the offences were committed as a juvenile against peers, the applicant had matured, undertaken counselling and treatment, shown insight and remorse, and the psychological evidence assessed his risk of violent recidivism as low. Considering the section 30(1) factors and the paramount need to protect children, the Tribunal was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the applicant did not pose a real and appreciable risk of harm to children, so the correct and preferable decision was to grant the clearance.

Court Disposition

The Children's Guardian's decision to refuse the Working with Children Check clearance was set aside and the respondent was directed to grant the clearance.

Orders

  • ["The decision of the Children's Guardian dated 15 February 2016 to refuse to grant the applicant a Working with Children Check clearance is set aside." 'In substitution thereof the respondent is to grant the applicant a Working with Children Check clearance.']