CRM v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 85

CRM v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 85

The applicant failed to discharge the statutory onus to rebut the presumption that he poses a risk to the safety of children, due to the seriousness of his historical offences involving child victims, his ongoing lack of insight into the impact of his conduct, and his failure to demonstrate understanding of child protection issues; accordingly, his application for an enabling order is dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: CRM; Respondent: Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Administrative Tribunal Application / Final Decision on Enabling Order
Outcome
Application for enabling order dismissed
Legal Topics
Working With Children Check Clearance, Enabling Order, Disqualified Person, Risk to Safety of Children, Statutory Presumption, Onus of Proof
Administrative Law Child Protection Working With Children Check Clearance Enabling Order Disqualified Person Risk to Safety of Children Statutory Presumption Onus of Proof

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CRM

Applicant

Children's Guardian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Tribunal Application / Final Decision on Enabling Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant, a disqualified person due to a 1953 conviction, has rebutted the statutory presumption of risk to the safety of children and is eligible for an enabling order under the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to discharge the statutory onus to rebut the presumption that he poses a risk to the safety of children, due to the seriousness of his historical offences involving child victims, his ongoing lack of insight into the impact of his conduct, and his failure to demonstrate understanding of child protection issues; accordingly, his application for an enabling order is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for enabling order dismissed

Orders

  • The applicant's application for an enabling order is dismissed.