BHL v Children's Guardian

In the case of BHL v Children's Guardian, the applicant sought review of the decision to refuse him a working with children check clearance. The applicant was a casual teacher at a TAFE who had been subject to disciplinary proceedings in relation to his relationship with a 17-year-old student. Allegations included non-consensual sexual intercourse, which were found to be sustained, and a finding of misconduct was made against the applicant. The applicant acknowledged an eight-month relationship with the student but denied any inappropriate conduct. The primary issue for the court was to determine whether the applicant posed a risk to the safety of children.

The court examined the evidence and the findings of the disciplinary proceedings to assess the risk the applicant posed to children. It considered the seriousness of the allegations and the findings of misconduct, as well as the applicant's denial of inappropriate conduct. The court determined that the disciplinary findings were a significant factor in assessing the risk posed by the applicant to children. Given the nature of the allegations and the findings of misconduct, the court concluded that the applicant did pose a risk to the safety of children.

Consequently, the court affirmed the decision of the respondent to refuse the applicant a working with children check clearance. The court found that the respondent's decision was reasonable and based on relevant considerations, particularly the disciplinary findings against the applicant. The court rejected the applicant's argument that he did not pose a risk to children, based on the seriousness of the allegations and the findings of misconduct. The decision was therefore affirmed, and the applicant's application for review was dismissed.