GJM v Children’s Guardian [2025] NSWCATAD 48

GJM v Children’s Guardian [2025] NSWCATAD 48

On the basis of the significant passage of time since the offence, absence of further offending, acceptance of responsibility, demonstration of insight, and evidence supporting low risk of re-offending, the Tribunal was positively satisfied that the applicant does not pose a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. Accordingly, the statutory presumption of risk was displaced and both the reasonable person and public interest tests under s 30(1A) were met, warranting the grant of an enabling order and a working with children clearance.

Parties
Applicant: GJM; Respondent: Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review Application / Merits Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Application for enabling order granted; respondent ordered to grant clearance.
Legal Topics
Working With Children Check, Disqualified Persons, Administrative Review, Risk Assessment, Public Interest
Administrative Law Child Protection Working With Children Check Disqualified Persons Administrative Review Risk Assessment Public Interest

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 4 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GJM

Applicant

Children's Guardian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review Application / Merits Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant poses a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children for the purposes of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether an enabling order should be made under s 28(1) of the Act
  3. 3 Application of 'reasonable person' and 'public interest' tests under s 30(1A) of the Act

Ratio Decidendi

On the basis of the significant passage of time since the offence, absence of further offending, acceptance of responsibility, demonstration of insight, and evidence supporting low risk of re-offending, the Tribunal was positively satisfied that the applicant does not pose a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. Accordingly, the statutory presumption of risk was displaced and both the reasonable person and public interest tests under s 30(1A) were met, warranting the grant of an enabling order and a working with children clearance.

Court Disposition

Application for enabling order granted; respondent ordered to grant clearance.

Orders

  • Pursuant to s 28(1) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW), the Tribunal declares that the applicant is not to be treated as a disqualified person for the specified offence.
  • Pursuant to s 28(6) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW), the Children's Guardian is ordered to grant the applicant a clearance forthwith.