CFJ v Children's Guardian

CFJ challenged the decision of the Children's Guardian to cancel their Working with Children Check clearance, a statutory requirement for those working with children. The Guardian had cancelled the clearance following CFJ's dismissal from their employment as a High School teacher. CFJ's wrongful dismissal proceedings were settled but did not address the clearance issue. The court examined whether the Guardian's decision was legally sound and whether CFJ posed a risk to children, given the paramount importance of protecting children from harm.

The primary legal issues involved the scope of the review under section 27 of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012, the burden of proof, and the interpretation of 'real and appreciable risk'. CFJ argued that the Guardian had not properly assessed the risk they posed to children. The court had to determine whether the Guardian's decision was correct and preferable, considering the evidence available at the time.

The court concluded that the Guardian's decision was legally sound and upheld it. The Guardian's role in assessing and mitigating risks to children's safety was critical, and the court found that the Guardian had adequately considered the relevant factors. The onus was on CFJ to prove that the Guardian's decision was flawed, a burden CFJ did not meet. The court held that CFJ's past conduct justified a real and appreciable risk to children, supporting the Guardian's decision.

The court's orders affirmed the Children's Guardian's decision to cancel CFJ's Working with Children Check clearance. The application for review was refused and dismissed. This decision underscored the importance of protecting children from potential harm, even in the absence of recent misconduct, and highlighted the limited scope of judicial review in such cases.