DGZ v Children's Guardian

The applicant, DGZ, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Children’s Guardian under section 27(2) of the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 to cancel their Working with Children Check Clearance. The dispute arose from an assessment which concluded there was an unacceptable risk of harm to children if the applicant were to continue working with children. The matter was heard by the Civil and Administrative Tribunal in Victoria.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Children’s Guardian’s decision to cancel the applicant's clearance was supported by the evidence, and whether it was appropriate to make a finding on the balance of probabilities that the alleged events occurred. Another significant issue was whether there was an unacceptable risk of harm, and whether a real and appreciable risk was posed by the applicant to the safety of children.

The Tribunal found that the Children’s Guardian's decision was based on a thorough assessment and was supported by the evidence. The Tribunal held that it was appropriate to make a finding on the balance of probabilities that the alleged events occurred, as this was the most appropriate standard in the context of child protection. The Tribunal also determined that the evidence demonstrated that there was an unacceptable risk of harm, and that the applicant posed a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children.

Accordingly, the Tribunal confirmed the decision of the Children’s Guardian to cancel the applicant's clearance and prohibited the publication or broadcast of the names of any persons mentioned in the proceedings, except for expert witnesses and officers of government agencies.