Civil and Administrative Tribunal
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: GXE v Children’s Guardian [2025] NSWCATAD 285 Hearing dates: 25 September 2025 Date of orders: 18 November 2025 Decision date: 18 November 2025 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: J Redfern PSM, Senior Member
A Limbury, General MemberDecision: The decision of the respondent dated 11 February 2025 be set aside and substituted with a decision that the applicant’s working with children check clearance be granted.
Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — application under Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 — jurisdiction following amendments under Child Protection (Working with Children) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2025 — administrative review of refusal — whether a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children — serious allegations of historical sexual abuse — charges withdrawn – no other criminal record, charges or allegations made against the applicant
PROCEDURE — admissibility of documents recording helpline reports – tender of documents authorised
Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997(NSW)
Child Protection Legislation Amendment (Children’s Guardian) Act 2013 (NSW)
Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 (NSW)
Child Protection (Working with Children) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2025 (NSW)
Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 (NSW)
Children’s Guardian Act 2019 (NSW)
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014
Civil and Administrative Act 2013 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Commissioner of Police v Eaton [2013] HCA 2
DAI v Children’s Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 308
DVV v Children’s Guardian [2020] NSWCATAD 237
Ferdinands v Commissioner for Public Employment [2006] HCA 5; (2006) 225 CLR 130
Hogan v Hinch (2011) 243 CLR 506
Mulholland v AEC [2004] HCA 41 at [39]; 220 CLR 181
PQR v Secretary, Department of Justice and Regulation (No 2) [2017] VSC 514
PQR v Secretary, Department of Justice and Regulation (No 2) [2017] VSC 514
VQB v The Secretary to the Department of Justice [2013] VCAT 789
ZZ v Secretary, Department of Justice [2013] VSC 267
Texts Cited: Explanatory Note to the Child Protection Legislation Amendment (Children’s Guardian) Bill 2013
Second reading speech, 5 August 2025 Hansard, p21
Category: Principal judgment Parties: GXE (Applicant)
The Children’s Guardian (Respondent)Representation: The Applicant (Self-represented)
Solicitor:
Counsel:
Crown Solicitor (Respondent)
J Curtin (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2025/00076902 Publication restriction: With the exception of officers of government agencies, the publication or broadcast of the name of any person mentioned in these proceedings or referred to in the documentary material lodged in these proceedings is prohibited. This order is made under sections 64(1)(a) and (1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.
Note: a reference to the name of a person includes a reference to any information, picture or other material that identifies the person or is likely to lead to the identification of the person.
REASONS FOR DECISION
Overview
-
This is an application for review of the decision by the respondent to refuse to grant the applicant a working with children check clearance under the Child Protection (Working with…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read GXE v Children's Guardian and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2025] NSWCATAD 285
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court had to consider whether the Guardian had correctly exercised their discretion in refusing GXE a working with children check clearance. Specifically, the court examined whether the Guardian's decision was based on a real and appreciable risk to the safety of children, considering the historical allegations against GXE. The admissibility of documents recording helpline reports was authorised, which helped in evaluating the risk assessment made by the Guardian.
The court found that the Guardian had not adequately justified the refusal of a clearance, as there were no current allegations or charges against GXE, and the historical charges were withdrawn. The court held that the Guardian's decision was not supported by the evidence and was therefore unlawful. As a result, the court set aside the Guardian's decision and substituted it with a decision that GXE's working with children check clearance be granted.
Orders
Orders of the court
The decision of the respondent dated 11 February 2025 be set aside and substituted with a decision that the applicant’s working with children check clearance be granted.
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.