Bachman v Public Safety Business Agency

The case of Bachman v Public Safety Business Agency involved Samantha Rayne Bachman, who had been employed to work in school canteens and provide homestays for children, and the Public Safety Business Agency, which had issued a negative notice preventing her from working with children. Bachman had previously held a positive notice but was convicted of a serious offence, leading to the issuance of the negative notice. Bachman sought a review of the decision to issue the negative notice, arguing that a positive notice should have been issued instead. The central legal issue was whether the issuance of a negative notice was in the best interests of the children, considering the evidence of both risk and protective factors. The court was required to balance the risk factors, such as Bachman's criminal conviction, against the protective factors, such as the absence of any prior incidents involving harm to children. The court found that the evidence demonstrated that the risk factors outweighed the protective factors, and that it was not in the best interests of the children for Bachman to be issued with a positive notice. Consequently, the decision to issue a negative notice was upheld. In confirming the decision, the court emphasised the importance of prioritising the safety and well-being of children in such contexts.