DG v Commission for Children and Young People [2003] NSWADT 162

DG v Commission for Children and Young People [2003] NSWADT 162

The Tribunal found that while the applicant may represent only a low-level risk to children as determined by expert evidence and the circumstances (including his age), a real and material risk remains. Since his proposed tutoring would be supervised and is not 'child-related employment' under the Act, no order is necessary, making the application otiose. Tribunal, nevertheless, dismissed the application but granted liberty to reapply at any time in the future should the applicant's circumstances change.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Declaration / Decision on Principal Matter
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['prohibited Employment' 'risk Assessment' 'tribunal Jurisdiction']
['child Protection' 'administrative Law'] ['prohibited Employment' 'risk Assessment' 'tribunal Jurisdiction']

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

Application for Declaration / Decision on Principal Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant, convicted of indecent assaults on children, should be declared not a prohibited person under the Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998' "Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction when proposed work is directly supervised and arguably not 'child-related employment' as defined" 'Whether the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that while the applicant may represent only a low-level risk to children as determined by expert evidence and the circumstances (including his age), a real and material risk remains. Since his proposed tutoring would be supervised and is not 'child-related employment' under the Act, no order is necessary, making the application otiose. Tribunal, nevertheless, dismissed the application but granted liberty to reapply at any time in the future should the applicant's circumstances change.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['Application is dismissed' 'A copy of these orders to be served on the Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Service.' 'The Applicant may make further application for an order under s 9(1) or s 8A of the Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998 at any time following the date of these orders.']