CRJ v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 170

CRJ v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 170

The Tribunal found, based on the evidence and the applicant's admissions, that he engaged in sexual acts with a person he knew to be a child at least 29 years his junior, displayed no insight or remorse for the inappropriate and exploitative nature of the conduct, and failed to appreciate the power imbalance and vulnerability of the victim. Accordingly, the Tribunal determined that the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children and affirmed the decision to refuse the Working with Children Check Clearance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Decision affirmed; refusal of Working with Children Check Clearance upheld
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'sexual Offences' 'administrative Review']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection' 'equal Opportunity'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'sexual Offences' 'administrative Review']

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 / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant poses a risk to the safety of children for the purpose of being granted a Working with Children Check Clearance under the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found, based on the evidence and the applicant's admissions, that he engaged in sexual acts with a person he knew to be a child at least 29 years his junior, displayed no insight or remorse for the inappropriate and exploitative nature of the conduct, and failed to appreciate the power imbalance and vulnerability of the victim. Accordingly, the Tribunal determined that the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children and affirmed the decision to refuse the Working with Children Check Clearance.

Court Disposition

Decision affirmed; refusal of Working with Children Check Clearance upheld

Orders

  • ["The Tribunal affirms the respondent's decision to refuse to grant the applicant a Working with Children Check Clearance."]