CSX v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 228

CSX v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 228

The applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to children due to findings that he twice used unreasonable and excessive force against juvenile detainees while in a position of authority, combined with his lack of insight into the inappropriateness of his actions in the later incident and the relatively recent occurrence. Therefore, the correct and preferable decision is to affirm the cancellation of his Working with Children Check clearance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Final Decision
Outcome
Application refused and dismissed; original decision affirmed
Legal Topics
['review of Working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk to Children' 'excessive Force by Juvenile Justice Officers' 'section 27 Review Under Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw)']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['review of Working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk to Children' 'excessive Force by Juvenile Justice Officers' 'section 27 Review Under Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw)']

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 / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children for the purpose of working with children check clearance' 'Whether use of force in two incidents constituted excessive force or assault against juvenile detainees' "Whether the cancellation of the applicant's Working with Children Check clearance was the correct and preferable decision"]

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to children due to findings that he twice used unreasonable and excessive force against juvenile detainees while in a position of authority, combined with his lack of insight into the inappropriateness of his actions in the later incident and the relatively recent occurrence. Therefore, the correct and preferable decision is to affirm the cancellation of his Working with Children Check clearance.

Court Disposition

Application refused and dismissed; original decision affirmed

Orders

  • ["The decision of the Children's Guardian dated 26 August 2016 to cancel the applicant's Working with Children Check clearance is affirmed." "The application for review of the decision of the Children's Guardian filed on 26 September 2016 is otherwise refused and dismissed."]