DP v Commission for Children and Young People [2003] NSWADT 48
The offence for which Mr DP was convicted in Tasmania would not have amounted to an offence in New South Wales, either at the time or now, and is therefore not a serious sexual offence under the Act. The Tribunal accordingly has no jurisdiction to consider the application.
- Parties
- Applicant: DP; Respondent: Commission for Children and Young People
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 March 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Declaration (tribunal) / Final Decision
- Outcome
- Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
- Legal Topics
- Prohibited Employment, Serious Sex Offences, Jurisdiction
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
DP
Applicant
Commission for Children and Young People
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Declaration (tribunal) / Final Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Is Mr DP a prohibited person within the meaning of s 5 of the Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998?
- 2 Does Mr DP pose a risk to the safety of children under s 9(5) of the Act?
Ratio Decidendi
The offence for which Mr DP was convicted in Tasmania would not have amounted to an offence in New South Wales, either at the time or now, and is therefore not a serious sexual offence under the Act. The Tribunal accordingly has no jurisdiction to consider the application.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
Orders
- The Tribunal has no jurisdiction: The offence of which the Applicant was convicted (Defilement of a girl under 17 years of age; 7.12.81; Tasmania) is not a serious sexual offence as defined under the Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998, ss 5(3)(b) & 5(4).
- Application is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment