DTS v Children’s Guardian [2020] NSWCATAD 167

DTS v Children’s Guardian [2020] NSWCATAD 167

The correct and preferable decision was to refuse the clearance because, although the Tribunal did not find the allegations of excessive discipline proved on the balance of probabilities, the circumstances surrounding the foster children's allegations and the applicant's response to Child CB's extensive burns gave rise to a serious risk of harm involving violence and neglect. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not sufficiently mitigated that risk, particularly because of her failure to fully explain what occurred and her apparent lack of insight, and was satisfied that she continued to pose a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Refusal to Grant a Working With Children Check Clearance / Principal Judgment on Application for Review Under S 27 of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw)
Outcome
Application unsuccessful; respondent's decision affirmed.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'child Related Work' 'foster Care Allegations' 'correct and Preferable Decision']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'child Related Work' 'foster Care Allegations' 'correct and Preferable Decision']

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 to Grant a Working With Children Check Clearance / Principal Judgment on Application for Review Under S 27 of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children if granted a working with children check clearance.' 'Whether circumstances surrounding allegations made by foster children and the burns sustained by Child CB give rise to a risk to the safety of children.' "Whether the respondent's refusal of the applicant's application for a working with children check clearance was the correct and preferable decision."]

Ratio Decidendi

The correct and preferable decision was to refuse the clearance because, although the Tribunal did not find the allegations of excessive discipline proved on the balance of probabilities, the circumstances surrounding the foster children's allegations and the applicant's response to Child CB's extensive burns gave rise to a serious risk of harm involving violence and neglect. The Tribunal found that the applicant had not sufficiently mitigated that risk, particularly because of her failure to fully explain what occurred and her apparent lack of insight, and was satisfied that she continued to pose a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children.

Court Disposition

Application unsuccessful; respondent's decision affirmed.

Orders

  • ["The decision of the respondent, made on 28 February 2019, to refuse the applicant's application for a working with child check clearance is affirmed."]