MR v Commission for Children and Young People [2005] NSWADT 212

MR v Commission for Children and Young People [2005] NSWADT 212

The Tribunal found that the index offences were serious but were committed against adult women, that MR had no other criminal history and no suggestion of offending against children or young people, and that he had become genuinely contrite, taken responsibility, engaged in treatment, and addressed stressors...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Declaration That Applicant Not a Prohibited Person Under S 9(1) of the Child Protection (prohibited Employment) Act 1998 / Principal Matter
Outcome
Conditional declaration granted.
Legal Topics
['prohibited Person Declaration' 'child Related Employment' 'risk to Safety of Children' 'serious Sex Offences' 'conditional Orders' 'medical Board Supervision']
['administrative Law' 'child Protection' 'employment Restrictions' 'medical Professional Regulation'] ['prohibited Person Declaration' 'child Related Employment' 'risk to Safety of Children' 'serious Sex Offences' 'conditional Orders' 'medical Board Supervision']

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 S 9(1) of the Child Protection (prohibited Employment) Act 1998 / Principal Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether MR does not pose a risk to the safety of children and young persons if allowed to work with them without direct supervision.' 'Whether any declaration under s 9(1) of the Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998 should be unconditional or subject to conditions.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the index offences were serious but were committed against adult women, that MR had no other criminal history and no suggestion of offending against children or young people, and that he had become genuinely contrite, taken responsibility, engaged in treatment, and addressed stressors including social isolation. Giving most weight to the recent evidence of Drs Allnutt and Lennings, the Tribunal accepted that without conditions MR posed a low but real and appreciable risk to older teenage female patients if relevant stressors reoccurred. The existing NSW Medical Tribunal and NSW Medical Board regime provided ongoing psychiatric, medication and employment-related...

Court Disposition

Conditional declaration granted.

Orders

  • ['It is declared that the Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998 is not to apply to MR in respect of the two offences of assault with acts of indecency for which he was convicted in the Sydney District Court on 3 May 2002 on the following conditions.' 'That MR complies with all conditions flowing from...