CRV v Anglicare NSW [2017] NSWCATAD 247

CRV v Anglicare NSW [2017] NSWCATAD 247

The conduct of the applicant in tying up a child with a skipping rope and securing the rope to a pole constituted inappropriate and unapproved physical restraint, contrary to the welfare and safety of the child and the applicable codes and policies. The applicant demonstrated insufficient insight into the inappropriateness of her actions. Therefore, the decision to de-authorise her as an authorised carer was correct and preferable.

Parties
Applicant: CRV; Respondent: Anglicare NSW
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Respondent's decision affirmed
Legal Topics
Authorised Carers, Physical Restraint of Children, Decision to De Authorise Carer, Correct and Preferable Decision
Administrative Law Child Protection Authorised Carers Physical Restraint of Children Decision to De Authorise Carer 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CRV

Applicant

Anglicare NSW

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision to de-authorise the applicant as an authorised carer was correct and preferable
  2. 2 Whether the use of physical restraint by the applicant was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The conduct of the applicant in tying up a child with a skipping rope and securing the rope to a pole constituted inappropriate and unapproved physical restraint, contrary to the welfare and safety of the child and the applicable codes and policies. The applicant demonstrated insufficient insight into the inappropriateness of her actions. Therefore, the decision to de-authorise her as an authorised carer was correct and preferable.

Court Disposition

Respondent's decision affirmed

Orders

  • The respondent's decision to de-authorise the applicant as an authorised carer is affirmed.