NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: CLL v Children's Guardian [2017] NSWCATAD 69 Hearing dates: 24 October 2016 Date of orders: 08 March 2017 Decision date: 08 March 2017 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: R Booby, Senior Member P Foreman, General Member Decision: 1. The decision of the Children's Guardian to refuse to grant the Applicant a Working With Children Check Clearance is affirmed. 2. Disclosure of the name of the Applicant and of any alleged victim or child is prohibited.
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 Catchwords: Administrative law – review under section 27 Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012 Working with children check – clearance – protective jurisdiction – safety and well- being of children. Applicant not guilty of trigger matters- whether Applicant poses threat to safety of children. Legislation Cited: Child Protection (Working with Children Act) 2012 NSW Crimes Act 1900 NSW Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 NSW Commission for Young Children and Young People Act 1998 NSW Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) Evidence Act 1995 NSW Cases Cited: YG & GG v Minister for Community Services [2002] NSWCA 247 Commission for Children and Young People v V [2002] NSWSC 949. ADV v Commission for Children and Young People [2012] NSWADT 8, RD v Commissioner NSW Commission for Children and Young People [2011] NSWADT 140] RV v Commission for Children and Young People [2007] NSWADT 299 Commissioner for Children and Young People v FZ [2011] NSWCA Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 Neat Holdings Pty Ltd v Karjan Holdings Pty Ltd (1992) 110 ALR 449 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs v QAAH of 2004 [2006] HCA 53 Category: Principal judgment Parties: CLL (Applicant) Children's Guardian (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: K Morrissey (Applicant) A Douglas-Baker (Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate