Event and Time
Event Description
In a case concerning child protection, the applicant faced allegations of indecent assault against children. Despite being acquitted at trial, the respondent, identified as the Children’s Guardian, denied the applicant a working with children check clearance. Subsequently, the applicant sought a review of this decision, which took place on 3 April 2019.
Application and Claims
- The applicant claimed to have been wrongfully denied the working with children clearance despite acquittal on all charges.
- The applicant pursued a costs order following the criminal trial due to the adverse outcomes of the allegations.
- A civil suit brought by the applicant for malicious prosecution, wrongful arrest, and false imprisonment was settled in the applicant's favor.
- The relevance of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) was raised in the context of understanding the applicant’s interactions and associations with children.
Judicial Decisions
- The respondent's decision to deny the working with children check clearance was set aside.
- The court ordered that the applicant be granted a working with children check clearance.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Applicant's Claims:
- The applicant maintained that the indecent assault allegations were baseless and pursued a working with children clearance post-acquittal. - Emphasized that his Autism Spectrum Disorder did not imply risk but should be interpreted in the context of his actions and intentions.
- Respondent's Arguments:
- The Children’s Guardian initially deemed the applicant as a potential risk despite the trial acquittal. - Suggested that the ASD could contribute to misunderstandings in the interpretation of the applicant's behavior around children.