FJU v Children’s Guardian [2024] NSWCATAD 90

FJU v Children’s Guardian [2024] NSWCATAD 90

Having considered the mandatory factors in s 30(1) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW), the Tribunal found that the applicant's serious and repeated violent conduct, including domestic violence and other offences between 2016 and 2020, his history of alcohol and substance issues, the short period since treatment and abstinence, the possibility of relapse, and the expert evidence that his risk was slightly enhanced meant he currently posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. The correct and preferable decision was therefore to affirm the refusal of the Working with Children Check Clearance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Refusal of Working With Children Check Clearance / Principal Judgment
Outcome
The respondent's decision to refuse the Working with Children Check Clearance was affirmed and the application was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'real and Appreciable Risk' 'violent Offending' 'substance Abuse' 'protective Jurisdiction']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'real and Appreciable Risk' 'violent Offending' 'substance Abuse' 'protective Jurisdiction']

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 of Working With Children Check Clearance / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant currently poses a risk to the safety of children having regard to s 30(1) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW).' 'If the applicant is not a risk to children, whether a reasonable person would allow direct unsupervised contact with the applicant while engaged in child-related work.' 'If the applicant is not a risk to children, whether granting a clearance would be in the public interest.']

Ratio Decidendi

Having considered the mandatory factors in s 30(1) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW), the Tribunal found that the applicant's serious and repeated violent conduct, including domestic violence and other offences between 2016 and 2020, his history of alcohol and substance issues, the short period since treatment and abstinence, the possibility of relapse, and the expert evidence that his risk was slightly enhanced meant he currently posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. The correct and preferable decision was therefore to affirm the refusal of the Working with Children Check Clearance.

Court Disposition

The respondent's decision to refuse the Working with Children Check Clearance was affirmed and the application was dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The decision of the respondent dated 4 June 2022 to refuse the applicant's Working with Children Check Clearance is affirmed." 'The application is dismissed.']