CWW v Children’s Guardian [2018] NSWCATAD 19

CWW v Children’s Guardian [2018] NSWCATAD 19

Having considered the s 30(1) factors and treating child safety as paramount, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. It found that the alleged July 2014 offending as charged did not occur, that Ms AB's complaint was exaggerated and fabricated in part, that the evidence did not establish abuse or attempted abuse of any child, and that expert evidence assessed the risk of future partner assault as low with no significant current risk factors specific to children. The Tribunal was also satisfied that a reasonable person acquainted with the relevant facts would allow direct unsupervised contact with the applicant while...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Refusal of Working With Children Check Clearance / Decision on Application for External Review
Outcome
Application allowed; respondent's decision set aside and working with children check clearance granted.
Legal Topics
['risk Assessment Under Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012' 'working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualifying Offences and Trigger Events' 'correct and Preferable Decision' 'child Safety']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection' 'working With Children Checks'] ['risk Assessment Under Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012' 'working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualifying Offences and Trigger Events' 'correct and Preferable Decision' 'child Safety']

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 Refusal of Working With Children Check Clearance / Decision on Application for External Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children if granted a working with children check clearance.' 'Whether a reasonable person would allow his or her child to have direct unsupervised contact with the applicant while the applicant was engaged in child-related work.' 'Whether it was in the public interest to make an order enabling the applicant to work with children.']

Ratio Decidendi

Having considered the s 30(1) factors and treating child safety as paramount, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. It found that the alleged July 2014 offending as charged did not occur, that Ms AB's complaint was exaggerated and fabricated in part, that the evidence did not establish abuse or attempted abuse of any child, and that expert evidence assessed the risk of future partner assault as low with no significant current risk factors specific to children. The Tribunal was also satisfied that a reasonable person acquainted with the relevant facts would allow direct unsupervised contact with the applicant while...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; respondent's decision set aside and working with children check clearance granted.

Orders

  • ["The respondent's decision made on 16 November 2016 to refuse the applicant's application for a working with children check clearance is set aside." 'In substitution for that decision a decision is made to grant the applicant with a working with children check clearance.']