CZZ v Children's Guardian

Case [2018] NSWCATAD 56


Civil and Administrative Tribunal


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: CZZ v Children’s Guardian [2018] NSWCATAD 56
Hearing dates: 28 September 2017
Date of orders: 13 March 2018
Decision date: 13 March 2018
Jurisdiction:Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before: J McAteer, Senior Member
Prof E Foreman, General Member
Decision:

(1) The applicant is not to be treated as a disqualified person for two offences of indecent assault under the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic).
(2) The application for an enabling order is granted.

(3) Pursuant to s28(6) of the Child Protection (Working With Children) Act 2012, the Children's Guardian is to grant a working with children check clearance to the applicant.

Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – child protection – working with children – disqualifying offences – enabling order – circumstances of offence –weight of evidence – discharge of onus
Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997
Child Protection (Prohibited Employment) Act 1998 (Repealed)
Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012
Child Protection (Working with Children) Regulation 2013
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
Evidence Act 1995
Cases Cited: AYU v NSW Office of the Children's Guardian [2014] NSWCATAD 69
BFC v The Children's Guardian [2014] NSWCATAD 90
BFX v Children's Guardian [2014] NSWCATAD 115
BGW v NSW Office of the Children’s Guardian [2014] NSWCATAD 179
BJB v Office of the Children's Guardian [2014] NSWCATAD 111
BJB v The Children's Guardian (No. 2) [2014] NSWCATAD 164
BKE v Children’s Guardian [2015] NSWSC 523
CGP v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 12
CHB v Children’s Guardian [2016] NSWCATAD 214
Children’s Guardian v CKF [2017] NSWSC 893
Commission for Children and Young People v V [2002] NSWSC 949; 56 NSWLR 476
Commissioner for Children and Young People v FZ [2011] NSWCA 111
CYY v Children's Guardian (No 2) NSWCATAD 262
Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298
M v M (1988) 166 CLR (HCA)
Office of the Children’s Guardian v CFW [2016] NSWSC 1406
R v Commission for Children and Young People [2002] NSWIRComm 101
Re: Control Investments Pty Ltd v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (No. 2) (1981) 3 ALD 88.
Smith v Commissioner of Police [2014] NSWCATAD 184
ZZ v Secretary of the Department of Justice [2013] VSC 267
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: CZZ (Applicant)
Children’s Guardian (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
M Giacomo (Respondent)

  Solicitors:
CZZ (Applicant in person)
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/00096493
Publication restriction: Pursuant to s 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 the Tribunal restricts disclosure of the name of the applicant, his victims or of evidence given and received in the Tribunal hearing or in relation to the proceedings which is likely to identify those persons.

REASONS FOR decision

Introduction

  1. On 30 March 2017 the applicant applied for administrative review in the Tribunal of a decision of the respondent to refuse to grant the applicant a Working with Children Check Clearance on the basis that he is a disqualified person. That finding was made on 6 March 2017.

  2. The Applicant in these proceedings is…

Continue reading CZZ v Children's Guardian

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
CZZ v Children's Guardian [2018] NSWCATAD 56
Case
[2018] NSWCATAD 56
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, CZZ, sought a review of the decision of the Children's Guardian not to issue a working with children check clearance due to two past convictions for indecent assault. The dispute was heard by the court which was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for an enabling order under section 28(6) of the Child Protection (Working With Children) Act 2012. The court had to consider whether the applicant was disqualified from working with children and whether the evidence was sufficient to discharge the onus placed on the applicant.

The court examined the nature of the offences and the circumstances in which they were committed. It determined that the applicant was not disqualified from working with children for those offences due to the weight of the evidence and other factors. The court found that the onus was discharged by the applicant and concluded that the Children's Guardian should grant a working with children check clearance to the applicant.

Accordingly, the court ruled in favour of the applicant and ordered that the applicant is not to be treated as a disqualified person for the two offences of indecent assault. The court granted the application for an enabling order and directed the Children's Guardian to issue a working with children check clearance to the applicant. This decision provides clarity on the application of the relevant legislation and the criteria for disqualifying offences in the context of working with children checks.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The applicant is not to be treated as a disqualified person for two offences of indecent assault under the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic).

(2) The application for an enabling order is granted.

(3) Pursuant to s28(6) of the Child Protection (Working With Children) Act 2012, the Children's Guardian is to grant a working with children check clearance to the applicant.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.