DDC v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 318

DDC v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 318

Having regard to the s 30(1) factors, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant did not pose a risk to the safety of children. Although the offences against his mother were serious, they were committed when the applicant was a child, were not against a child, occurred in the context of behavioural and mental health issues and a dysfunctional relationship with his mother, and the last violent offence against his mother was seven years earlier. The applicant had matured, maintained unblemished employment including caring for vulnerable people, sought and accepted treatment, had favourable references and support, and health professionals did not consider him a risk to children. The...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Review of Refusal of Working With Children Check Clearance Under Section 27 Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 / Administrative Review Before the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Outcome
The respondent's decision dated 26 May 2017 was set aside and the applicant was granted a working with children check clearance.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'child Safety' 'review of Administrative Decision' 'violent Offences Committed as a Child']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'child Safety' 'review of Administrative Decision' 'violent Offences Committed as a Child']

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

Review of Refusal of Working With Children Check Clearance Under Section 27 Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 / Administrative Review Before the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant poses a risk to the safety of children having regard to the factors in s 30(1) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012.' 'Whether a reasonable person would allow his or her child to have direct contact with the applicant that was not directly supervised while the applicant was engaged in child-related work.' 'Whether it is in the public interest to make an order enabling the applicant to work with children.']

Ratio Decidendi

Having regard to the s 30(1) factors, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant did not pose a risk to the safety of children. Although the offences against his mother were serious, they were committed when the applicant was a child, were not against a child, occurred in the context of behavioural and mental health issues and a dysfunctional relationship with his mother, and the last violent offence against his mother was seven years earlier. The applicant had matured, maintained unblemished employment including caring for vulnerable people, sought and accepted treatment, had favourable references and support, and health professionals did not consider him a risk to children. The...

Court Disposition

The respondent's decision dated 26 May 2017 was set aside and the applicant was granted a working with children check clearance.

Orders

  • ['The decision of the respondent dated 26 May 2017 is set aside.' 'In substitution for that decision, the following order is made; The applicant is granted a working with children check clearance.' 'The disclosure of the name of the applicant and any victim or child referred to in these reasons is prohibited.']