EJA v Children’s Guardian [2021] NSWCATAD 202

EJA v Children’s Guardian [2021] NSWCATAD 202

The applicant's serious and repeated domestic violence-related offending, alcohol-related offending, breach of court orders, drink driving while his child was in the car, continued alcohol consumption, lack of further counselling, minimisation of conduct and lack of insight established a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. A reasonable person aware of those matters would not allow unsupervised direct contact with their child while the applicant engaged in child-related work, and the public interest in the safety, welfare and well-being of children did not support enabling him to work with children. The correct and preferable decision was to affirm the cancellation of the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Decision to Cancel Working With Children Check Clearance / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review and dismissed the application for administrative review.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualifying Offences' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'domestic Violence' 'administrative Review']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualifying Offences' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'domestic Violence' 'administrative Review']

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 Decision to Cancel Working With Children Check Clearance / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Children's Guardian's decision to cancel the applicant's Working With Children Check Clearance should be affirmed, varied or set aside." 'Whether the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children.' 'Whether the mandatory considerations in s 30(1) of the Child Protection (Working With Children) Act 2012 support enabling the applicant to work with children.' 'Whether a reasonable person would allow their child to have unsupervised direct contact with the applicant while engaged in child-related work and whether making such an order is in the public interest.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's serious and repeated domestic violence-related offending, alcohol-related offending, breach of court orders, drink driving while his child was in the car, continued alcohol consumption, lack of further counselling, minimisation of conduct and lack of insight established a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. A reasonable person aware of those matters would not allow unsupervised direct contact with their child while the applicant engaged in child-related work, and the public interest in the safety, welfare and well-being of children did not support enabling him to work with children. The correct and preferable decision was to affirm the cancellation of the...

Court Disposition

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review and dismissed the application for administrative review.

Orders

  • ['The decision under review is affirmed.' 'The application for administrative review is dismissed.']