Australia, June 18 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on May 19:

1. The Children's Guardian refused the applicant a Working With Children Check Clearance (WWCCC) because it is satisfied that the applicant poses a risk to the safety of children. The primary reason for this was because of allegations of sexual assault against his 11-year-old stepdaughter (the complainant) alleged to have occurred in 1986 to 1987. The applicant seeks an administrative review of the decision. We have decided to affirm the respondent's decision to refuse the applicant a WWCCC for the following reasons.

2. Due to the sensitive nature of these proceedings, an order was made on 24 October 2024 under subsection 64(1) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (CAT Act) that, with the exception of expert witnesses and 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. To give effect to this order, the pseudonym 'GQT' has been used for the applicant's name and the names of persons (other than expert witnesses and officers of government agencies) have not been disclosed.

Material before the Tribunal

3. The applicant provided his Application to the Tribunal, a written character reference and written submissions to the respondent and the Tribunal.

4. The respondent provided a bundle of documents as required by s 58 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (ADR Act), open and confidential versions of an affidavit of a NSW Police officer with an Exhibit, open and confidential versions of submissions to the Tribunal for confidentiality orders, and written submissions to the applicant and the Tribunal.

The hearing

5. The respondent sought confidentiality orders from the Tribunal in relation to the confidential version of the affidavit of a NSW Police officer with a confidential Exhibit and confidential submissions. Submissions were received by the Tribunal from both parties in relation to this matter and there was a closed hearing during which confidential information was provided by the respondent to the Tribunal. This is addressed further below.

6. No witnesses were required by the parties for cross examination at the hearing.

7. Both parties made oral submissions at the hearing.

The applicant's case

8. The applicant submits that the Tribunal should order the respondent to grant him a WWCCC.

The respondent's case

9. The respondent submitted that the Tribunal should dismiss the application and affirm the decision to refuse the applicant a WWCCC. The respondent submitted that the applicant poses a risk to the safety of children and should not be granted a WWCCC on the basis of the considerations in s 30(1) and s 30(1A) of the Act.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/196d6c8ad7db40b392228d9e)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.