DKP v Children's Guardian - [2018] NSWCATAD 303

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: DKP v Children’s Guardian [2018] NSWCATAD 303
Hearing dates: 30 July 2018, 14 September 2018, 25 October 2018
Date of orders: 25 October 2018
Decision date: 25 October 2018
Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before: J McAteer Senior Member R Royer General Member
Decision:
(1) Pursuant to s 16(3A) of the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 we suspend the applicant’s reporting period by 137 days
(2) Pursuant to s 16(8) of the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 the Registrar notify the Commissioner of Police of the terms of this order.

Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Child Protection – Offenders Registration – Whether Jurisdiction arises – Whether applicant entitled to reduction under Act for periods overseas – Savings Provisions - Jurisdiction
Legislation Cited: Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000
Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Cth)
Judiciary Act 1993 (Cth)
Passport Legislation Amendment (Overseas Travel by Child Sex Offenders) Act 2017
Cases Cited: Albarran v The Members of the Companies Auditors & Liquidators Disciplinary Board [2007] HCH 23
Burns v Corbett [2018] HCA 15
Gaynor v Burns [2017] NSWCA 3
Health Care Complaints Commission v Murray [2018] NSW CATOD 119
Johnson v Dibbin, Gatsby v Gatsby [2018] NSWCATAP 45
Medical Board of Australia v Kemp [2018] VSCA168
Precision Data Holdings Limited v Wills [1991] at HCA 58
Zistis v Zistis [2018] NSWSC 722
Texts Cited: Nil
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: DKP (Applicant)
Children’s Guardian (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
A Douglas-Baker (Respondent)
Solicitors:
DKP (Self Represented) (Applicant)
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2018/00098370
Publication restriction: s-64 (1) NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal applies to the name of the applicant and any witnesses or individuals due to the confidential nature of any evidence or matter or for any other reason, it may (of its own motion or on the application of a party) make any one or more of the following orders:(a) an order prohibiting or restricting the disclosure of the name of any person (whether or not a party to proceedings in the Tribunal or a witness summoned by, or appearing before, the Tribunal).

EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR DECISION

An application was filed on 28 March 2018 with the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal seeking a review under the Child Protection (Offenders’ Registration) Act 2000, and Passport Legislation Amendment (Overseas Travel by Child Sex Offenders) Act 2017.
The orders sought were that: the original decision be re-instated, that amendments and provisions to be included so that double punishment does not occur and fairness and equality is applied to all who fall under the Act, and in line with other Acts in Australia. The applicant filed submissions attached and various cases which have been referred to in these reasons.
These proceedings have been heard over the course of three days, two of them being part days, and one of them being a full day’s hearing.
During…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading DKP v Children's Guardian

Details

AGLC: DKP v Children's Guardian [2018] NSWCATAD 303
Case: [2018] NSWCATAD 303
Decision Date: 25 October 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of DKP v Children's Guardian involved an application by the applicant, DKP, for a reduction in the time they would need to report to authorities under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000. DKP had spent significant time overseas and was seeking a reduction in the reporting period on the basis of the time spent outside Australia. The dispute was heard and determined by the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether it had jurisdiction to consider DKP's application for a reduction in the reporting period, and if so, whether DKP was entitled to a reduction under the Act for the periods they were overseas. The court also needed to consider the operation of the savings provisions of the Act in determining the appropriate outcome. The applicant argued that the time spent overseas should be excluded from the calculation of the reporting period, while the respondent, the Children's Guardian, contended that the court did not have jurisdiction to make such an order.

The court found that it did have jurisdiction to consider the application and that the savings provisions of the Act allowed for a reduction in the reporting period for time spent overseas. The court determined that DKP was entitled to a reduction in their reporting period by 137 days, the period they had spent outside Australia. The court ordered that the applicant's reporting period be suspended by 137 days and that the Registrar notify the Commissioner of Police of the terms of this order.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Pursuant to s 16(3A) of the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 we suspend the applicant’s reporting period by 137 days

(2) Pursuant to s 16(8) of the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 the Registrar notify the Commissioner of Police of the terms of this order.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	DKP v Children’s Guardian [2018] NSWCATAD 303
Hearing dates:	30 July 2018, 14 September 2018, 25 October 2018
Date of orders:	25 October 2018
Decision date:	25 October 2018
Jurisdiction:	Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before:	J McAteer Senior Member R Royer General Member
Decision:	(1) Pursuant to s 16(3A) of the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 we suspend the applicant’s reporting period by 137 days (2) Pursuant to s 16(8) of the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 the Registrar notify the Commissioner of Police of the terms of this order.
Catchwords:	ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Child Protection – Offenders Registration – Whether Jurisdiction arises – Whether applicant entitled to reduction under Act for periods overseas – Savings Provisions - Jurisdiction
Legislation Cited:	Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Cth) Judiciary Act 1993 (Cth) Passport Legislation Amendment (Overseas Travel by Child Sex Offenders) Act 2017
Cases Cited:	Albarran v The Members of the Companies Auditors & Liquidators Disciplinary Board [2007] HCH 23 Burns v Corbett [2018] HCA 15 Gaynor v Burns [2017] NSWCA 3 Health Care Complaints Commission v Murray [2018] NSW CATOD 119 Johnson v Dibbin, Gatsby v Gatsby [2018] NSWCATAP 45 Medical Board of Australia v Kemp [2018] VSCA168 Precision Data Holdings Limited v Wills [1991] at HCA 58 Zistis v Zistis [2018] NSWSC 722
Texts Cited:	Nil
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	DKP (Applicant) Children’s Guardian (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: A Douglas-Baker (Respondent) Solicitors: DKP (Self Represented) (Applicant) Crown Solicitor’s Office (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2018/00098370
Publication restriction:	s-64 (1) NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal applies to the name of the applicant and any witnesses or individuals due to the confidential nature of any evidence or matter or for any other reason, it may (of its own motion or on the application of a party) make any one or more of the following orders:(a) an order prohibiting or restricting the disclosure of the name of any person (whether or not a party to proceedings in the Tribunal or a witness summoned by, or appearing before, the Tribunal).