KF v Commission for Children and Young People [2005] NSWADT 48

KF v Commission for Children and Young People [2005] NSWADT 48

The Tribunal granted the declaration because the acceptable evidence did not establish a sufficient likelihood that KF constituted a real and appreciable risk to children or young persons. The index offence was at the lowest end of serious sex offences and was not shown by the expert evidence to be sexually...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Declaration That Applicant Not a Prohibited Person Under the Child Protection (prohibited Employment) Act 1998 / Principal Matter
Outcome
Application granted; declaration made that the Act is not to apply to KF in respect of the indecent assault offence.
Legal Topics
['prohibited Employment' 'serious Sex Offence' 'risk to Safety of Children' 'expert Evidence' 'declaration Under Child Protection (prohibited Employment) Act 1998']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection' 'employment Prohibition'] ['prohibited Employment' 'serious Sex Offence' 'risk to Safety of Children' 'expert Evidence' 'declaration Under Child Protection (prohibited Employment) Act 1998']

Source-derived case record

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 Declaration That Applicant Not a Prohibited Person Under the Child Protection (prohibited Employment) Act 1998 / Principal Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal should make an order that the Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998 not apply to KF in respect of the indecent assault offence.' 'Whether KF posed a risk to the safety of children within the meaning of s 9(4) of the Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998.' 'What weight should be given to the psychiatric and psychological evidence, particularly the evidence of Professor Greenberg and Dr Canaris.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal granted the declaration because the acceptable evidence did not establish a sufficient likelihood that KF constituted a real and appreciable risk to children or young persons. The index offence was at the lowest end of serious sex offences and was not shown by the expert evidence to be sexually motivated; the other criminal history and conduct matters did not demonstrate risk to children; and little weight was given to Professor Greenberg's adverse opinion because many of its factual bases were erroneous, irrelevant, exaggerated, discountable or explainable and his evidence raised concerns about objectivity. The Tribunal preferred the clear and credible opinion of Dr Canaris...

Court Disposition

Application granted; declaration made that the Act is not to apply to KF in respect of the indecent assault offence.

Orders

  • ['The Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998 is not to apply to KF in respect of the offence of indecent assault for which he was convicted on 11 April 2003.']