ECT v Children’s Guardian [2020] NSWCATAD 185

ECT v Children’s Guardian [2020] NSWCATAD 185

The Tribunal affirmed the cancellation because it was not satisfied that ECT did not pose a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. It found that A referred to in the psychologist's notes was the same A protected by the 2018 AVO, that ECT had been in a relationship with A from the youth service when she was about 16, that he was approximately eight years older and in a position of trust as mentor/coach, and that he subjected A to harassment and intimidation when the relationship ended. His denials were unreliable, the psychological and reference evidence carried little weight on risk, and insufficient evidence showed that he had addressed emotional regulation issues...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Cancellation of Working With Children Check Clearance / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Decision affirmed; application unsuccessful.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'merits Review' 'apprehended Violence Order' 'child Related Work']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'merits Review' 'apprehended Violence Order' 'child Related Work']

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 Cancellation of Working With Children Check Clearance / Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal should affirm or set aside the Children's Guardian's decision cancelling the applicant's working with children check clearance." 'Whether, as at the date of hearing, the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children.' 'Whether the evidence established that the applicant had been in a relationship with a vulnerable 16 year old student while acting as mentor/coach and had subjected her to harassment and intimidation.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal affirmed the cancellation because it was not satisfied that ECT did not pose a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. It found that A referred to in the psychologist's notes was the same A protected by the 2018 AVO, that ECT had been in a relationship with A from the youth service when she was about 16, that he was approximately eight years older and in a position of trust as mentor/coach, and that he subjected A to harassment and intimidation when the relationship ended. His denials were unreliable, the psychological and reference evidence carried little weight on risk, and insufficient evidence showed that he had addressed emotional regulation issues...

Court Disposition

Decision affirmed; application unsuccessful.

Orders

  • ["The decision of the Children's Guardian dated 7 November 2019, cancelling ECT's working with children check clearance is affirmed."]