DAR v Children’s Guardian [2018] NSWSC 942

DAR v Children’s Guardian [2018] NSWSC 942

The Supreme Court held that none of the alleged errors were made out: the Tribunal's reasons and process satisfied the statutory requirements, there was no error in the approach to risk or the reasonable person test, the admission of opinion evidence was not legal error in this context, and the Tribunal's findings were open on the evidence. The summons was dismissed and costs ordered against the plaintiff.

Parties
Plaintiff: DAR; Defendant: The Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Appeal / Final Judgment in Supreme Court on Appeal From Tribunal
Outcome
Plaintiff's further amended summons dismissed; costs ordered against plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Working With Children Check, Adequacy of Reasons, Admission of Opinion Evidence, Application of Reasonable Person Test, Assessment of Risk to Children
Administrative Law Child Protection Working With Children Check Adequacy of Reasons Admission of Opinion Evidence Application of Reasonable Person Test Assessment of Risk to Children

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DAR

Plaintiff

The Children's Guardian

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Administrative Law Appeal / Final Judgment in Supreme Court on Appeal From Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal failed to give adequate reasons as required by s 62(3) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal misapplied the statutory test for 'risk to safety of children' under s 18(2) Child Protection (Working With Children) Act
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal failed to consider or adequately explain rejection of the plaintiff's evidence and supporting witnesses

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that none of the alleged errors were made out: the Tribunal's reasons and process satisfied the statutory requirements, there was no error in the approach to risk or the reasonable person test, the admission of opinion evidence was not legal error in this context, and the Tribunal's findings were open on the evidence. The summons was dismissed and costs ordered against the plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's further amended summons dismissed; costs ordered against plaintiff.

Orders

  • Dismiss the further amended summons.
  • Order the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs.