EJV v Children’s Guardian [2020] NSWCATAD 203

EJV v Children’s Guardian [2020] NSWCATAD 203

The Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children, given the acquittals, lack of logically probative evidence to the contrary, the expert psychological assessment indicating below average risk, and 33 years of no further allegations or offences. Accordingly, the applicant met the statutory criteria and was entitled to a working with children check clearance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Final Decision
Outcome
application allowed; decision set aside; clearance granted
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check' 'risk Assessment' 'review of Administrative Decision' 'sexual Offences Historic Allegations' 'public Interest Assessment']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection' 'equal Opportunity'] ['working With Children Check' 'risk Assessment' 'review of Administrative Decision' 'sexual Offences Historic Allegations' 'public Interest Assessment']

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 / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children under the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW)' 'Whether a reasonable person would allow unsupervised contact with the applicant' 'Whether granting a clearance is in the public interest']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was not satisfied that the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children, given the acquittals, lack of logically probative evidence to the contrary, the expert psychological assessment indicating below average risk, and 33 years of no further allegations or offences. Accordingly, the applicant met the statutory criteria and was entitled to a working with children check clearance.

Court Disposition

application allowed; decision set aside; clearance granted

Orders

  • ['Publication or broadcasting of the names of the applicant and any person mentioned in these proceedings (except certain experts and officers) is prohibited under s 64(1) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.' 'A hearing is dispensed with; the matter is to be decided on the written submissions and...