BFC v The Children's Guardian

The applicants, BFC, sought to overturn a decision by the Children's Guardian that they were a disqualified person under the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act, 2012 due to previous convictions for incest. The dispute was heard and determined by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The fundamental legal questions before the Tribunal centred on the interpretation and application of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act, 2012, specifically regarding the definition of a "disqualified person" and the relevance of past criminal convictions in determining eligibility for a Working with Children check clearance.

The Tribunal examined the statutory language and legislative intent behind the Act, ultimately concluding that the historical nature of the incest offences and the significant passage of time since the convictions were imposed, coupled with the applicants' subsequent rehabilitation, warranted a departure from the literal interpretation of the Act. The Tribunal found that the Act's purpose was to protect children from current risks, and the applicants' past convictions did not reflect a present danger. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled that the applicants should not be deemed disqualified persons under the Act and ordered the Children's Guardian to grant the applicants a Working with Children check clearance.

In light of the Tribunal's findings, the applicants were declared not to be disqualified persons for the purposes of the Act in respect of the specified offences. The Tribunal directed the Children's Guardian to issue a Working with Children check clearance to the applicants, thereby allowing them to engage in activities that require such clearance.