BZU v Children's Guardian

In the case of BZU v Children's Guardian, the applicant sought a review of a decision by the Children's Guardian to refuse a working with children check clearance. The dispute was heard by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). The applicant, who had previously been convicted of murder in 1989 and served 15 years of a 13-year non-parole period, argued that the Guardian's decision was incorrect and should be reviewed.

The central legal issue was whether the Tribunal was correct in affirming the Guardian's decision to deny the clearance. This required determining whether the applicant posed a risk to the safety of children, and if so, whether the Guardian's decision was the correct and preferable one based on the evidence before the Tribunal. The applicant bore the onus of proving that the Guardian's decision was flawed.

The Tribunal examined the evidence and concluded that the applicant did indeed pose a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children. The Tribunal found that the Guardian's decision was both correct and preferable, given the material before it. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Children's Guardian and dismissed the applicant's review application.

The final orders were that the decision of the Children's Guardian dated 19 January 2015, which refused the applicant a Working with Children Check clearance, was affirmed. The application for review of this decision, filed on 6 February 2015, was refused and dismissed.