BJB v The Children's Guardian (No 2)

The parties involved in this case are BJB, the applicant, and The Children's Guardian, the respondent. The dispute centres around the applicant's eligibility for a working with children check clearance, which was denied due to his past conviction for unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 16 years. The case was heard in the court, which was tasked with determining whether the applicant met the criteria to be considered a disqualified person under the Child Protection Working with Children Act 2012.

The primary legal issue was whether the applicant had successfully discharged the onus of proving that he did not pose a risk to the safety of children, despite his prior conviction. The court had to consider the applicant's history and the relevant statutory provisions to determine if the applicant's past conduct disqualified him from obtaining the clearance. Additionally, the court needed to assess the appropriate weight to give to the historical nature of the conviction and the applicant's subsequent conduct.

The court found that the applicant had demonstrated sufficient evidence to establish that he did not pose a risk to children. The court concluded that the historical nature of the conviction and the applicant's subsequent good conduct were significant factors. The court further determined that the applicant had met the required threshold to be granted a working with children check clearance. Consequently, the court ordered that the applicant should not be treated as a disqualified person under the Act and that the respondent must grant the applicant the clearance.

In summary, the court ruled in favour of the applicant, declaring that he was not a disqualified person and ordering the respondent to grant him a working with children check clearance. The decision hinged on the applicant's demonstrated lack of risk to children and the historical context of his conviction.