WM v Barnardos Australia [2011] NSWADT 164

WM v Barnardos Australia [2011] NSWADT 164

The Tribunal found the applicant’s conduct was a single, isolated incident not serious enough to warrant immediate de-registration in accordance with the respondent’s own policy; procedural steps such as warnings and support person opportunities had not been followed. The correct and preferable decision was to set aside the de-registration and restore the applicant's name to the respondent's family day care carer register.

Parties
Applicant: WM; Respondent: Barnardos Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Merits Review – Final Decision
Outcome
Decision of the respondent set aside; applicant's name restored to the day care carer register
Legal Topics
Review of Administrative Decisions, Family Day Care Licensing, Child Safety and Supervision, Procedural Fairness
Administrative Law Childcare Services Review of Administrative Decisions Family Day Care Licensing Child Safety and Supervision Procedural Fairness

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WM

Applicant

Barnardos Australia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review / Merits Review – Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether removal of applicant from family day care carer register was reasonable and justified under relevant legislation and policies
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's conduct warranted de-registration or a lesser disciplinary measure such as a warning

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found the applicant’s conduct was a single, isolated incident not serious enough to warrant immediate de-registration in accordance with the respondent’s own policy; procedural steps such as warnings and support person opportunities had not been followed. The correct and preferable decision was to set aside the de-registration and restore the applicant's name to the respondent's family day care carer register.

Court Disposition

Decision of the respondent set aside; applicant's name restored to the day care carer register

Orders

  • The decision of the respondent is set aside.
  • In substitution, it is ordered that the name of the applicant be restored to the respondent's family day care carer register.