FKZ v Children’s Guardian [2023] NSWCATAD 169

FKZ v Children’s Guardian [2023] NSWCATAD 169

The Tribunal affirmed the refusal because, after considering the totality of the evidence and the mandatory factors under s 30(1), it was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. Although several serious allegations were found to have no foundation or were not given weight, the Tribunal found it possible that the shower toothbrush allegation occurred, found that sexualised behaviours in the household occurred and that the applicant failed to act protectively towards children in her care, found that she frequently smacked Child 1 with her hands, and found it possible that she excluded Child 1 from family treat...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Administrative Review Under S 27(1) of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) of a Refusal to Grant a Working With Children Check Clearance / Review of the Children's Guardian's Decision Dated 5 April 2022
Outcome
The decision of the Children's Guardian dated 5 April 2022 to refuse to grant the applicant a working with children check clearance was affirmed.
Legal Topics
['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'foster Care' 'schedule 1 and Schedule 2 Matters' 'protective Jurisdiction']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection'] ['working With Children Check Clearance' 'risk Assessment' 'risk to the Safety of Children' 'foster Care' 'schedule 1 and Schedule 2 Matters' '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

Application for Administrative Review Under S 27(1) of the Child Protection (working With Children) Act 2012 (nsw) of a Refusal to Grant a Working With Children Check Clearance / Review of the Children's Guardian's Decision Dated 5 April 2022

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant does not pose a risk to the safety of children under s 18(2) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW).' 'Whether allegations arising from the 2019 Criminal Trial and subsequent agency investigations supported a finding of a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children.' "Whether the applicant's denials, expert evidence, character references, history of child-related work and asserted protective factors displaced concerns arising from the allegations and findings."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal affirmed the refusal because, after considering the totality of the evidence and the mandatory factors under s 30(1), it was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. Although several serious allegations were found to have no foundation or were not given weight, the Tribunal found it possible that the shower toothbrush allegation occurred, found that sexualised behaviours in the household occurred and that the applicant failed to act protectively towards children in her care, found that she frequently smacked Child 1 with her hands, and found it possible that she excluded Child 1 from family treat...

Court Disposition

The decision of the Children's Guardian dated 5 April 2022 to refuse to grant the applicant a working with children check clearance was affirmed.

Orders

  • ["The decision of the Children's Guardian dated 5 April 2022 to refuse to grant the applicant a working with children check clearance is affirmed."]