ENT v Children’s Guardian [2021] NSWCATAD 279

ENT v Children’s Guardian [2021] NSWCATAD 279

The applicant did not discharge his onus of rebutting the statutory presumption that he poses a risk to the safety of children. The Tribunal found a pattern of sexual misconduct, including the disqualifying offence and further behaviours of concern, steadfast denial or lack of recollection, lack of insight, lack of remorse, and failure to obtain recommended treatment. It was not satisfied that a reasonable person with knowledge of the particulars would allow unsupervised direct contact with children in child-related work, nor that granting the order was in the public interest.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Application by a Disqualified Person for an Enabling Order Under S 28(1) of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) So That He Not Be Treated as a Disqualified Person for the Purposes of a Working With Children Check Clearance. / Principal Judgment After Hearing in the Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales.
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualified Person' 'enabling Order' 'sexual Offending' 'frotteuristic Disorder' 'risk to Safety of Children']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'disqualified Person' 'enabling Order' 'sexual Offending' 'frotteuristic Disorder' 'risk to Safety of Children']

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

Application by a Disqualified Person for an Enabling Order Under S 28(1) of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) So That He Not Be Treated as a Disqualified Person for the Purposes of a Working With Children Check Clearance. / Principal Judgment After Hearing in the Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an enabling order declaring that he not be treated as a disqualified person for the purposes of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW).' 'Whether the applicant rebutted the presumption in s 28(7) that he poses a risk to the safety of children.' "Whether a reasonable person with knowledge of the applicant's offences and surrounding facts would allow their children to have direct contact with him while engaged in child-related work without direct supervision." 'Whether it was in the public interest for the applicant to be enabled to work with children.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not discharge his onus of rebutting the statutory presumption that he poses a risk to the safety of children. The Tribunal found a pattern of sexual misconduct, including the disqualifying offence and further behaviours of concern, steadfast denial or lack of recollection, lack of insight, lack of remorse, and failure to obtain recommended treatment. It was not satisfied that a reasonable person with knowledge of the particulars would allow unsupervised direct contact with children in child-related work, nor that granting the order was in the public interest.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for an enabling order under s 28(1) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW) is dismissed.']