Teacher convicted for failing to report sexual abuse of a child

Nov 6, 2023 | Publication

Teacher, Mr Webb of Trinity College Perth, was unsuccessful in his appeal against his conviction of failing to report sexual abuse of a child in a decision delivered on 13 October 2021.

In April 2017, a group of boys from the school went on a school rugby trip to Japan. Mr Webb was one of three teachers who accompanied the boys on the rugby trip.

On 11 April 2017, one of the boys, AB, was assaulted by a group of boys. In the course of the assault, the boys held AB down, removed his underwear and penetrated his anus with an object. AB later discovered that the object was a carrot. There was no contest at trial that AB was assaulted in the manner that he described.

Mr Webb did not report the incident in the form required by the Children and Community Services Act 2004 (WA). The incident was ultimately reported by the Acting Headmaster of the school.

The issue at trial was whether the appellant ‘believe on reasonable grounds’ that AB had been the subject of sexual abuse. That is, whether Mr Webb had a subjective state of mind inclining towards assent to, rather than rejecting, the proposition that AB had been the subject of sexual abuse.

The Court found Mr Webb guilty of being a teacher who in the course of his work as a teacher formed the belief on reasonable grounds that a child had been the subject of sexual abuse, he failed to report that belief as soon as practicable after forming the belief, contrary to s 124B of the Children and Community Services Act 2004 (WA).

His Honour entered a judgment of conviction, imposed a fine of $1,200 and made a spent conviction order.

On appeal the Court held that to the extent that Mr Webb teacher’s interview contained denials of the Mr Webb’s positive belief, those denials must be rejected in light of all of the circumstances. Those denials could not, when considered in light of all of the circumstances, give rise to a reasonable inference consistent with innocence. The learned magistrate was therefore correct to conclude that the only reasonable inference was that Mr Webb formed the requisite belief and that it was on reasonable grounds.

The case of Webb v Tang WASC 344 can be read in full here <https://jade.io/article/841410.

The information in this publication is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavour to provide accurate and timely information, we do not guarantee that the information in this publication is accurate at the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. We are not responsible for the information of any source to which a link is provided or reference is made and exclude all liability in connection with use of these sources. If you do not wish to receive newsletters from us, please let us know.

Latest Insights

The Rise of Generative AI in Law and the Need for Caution

Generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI), a subset of artificial intelligence focused on creating new content, has gained significant traction in various industries, including law. Capable of producing text, images, and audio, platforms like ChatGPT are among the...

Australia Introduces Statutory Tort for Serious Invasions of Privacy

The Australian legal landscape is about to undergo a significant transformation with the introduction of a statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy. This change comes with the passage of the Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2024 by the Commonwealth...

Building Disputes – Which Court or Tribunal Deals with Them?

In New South Wales, there are different forums to have building disputes and claims addressed. The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal handles building disputes particularly residential building work claims.  There are numerous claims prosecuted and defended in...

When should a business take legal action on an overdue account?

Generally speaking, an overdue account should be acted on promptly.  The longer it is left, the greater the likelihood the account will need to be written off. Unless the debtor has a satisfactory reason for delaying payment, the account should be followed...

Court Rules Against Kmart in Personal Injury Appeal

In a recent case, Kmart has been held liable for injuries sustained by a customer in its Woy Woy store, after a mountain bike in a heavy, oversized box fell from another customer's shopping trolley, injuring Ms Rita Marmara. The New South Wales Court of Appeal upheld...

Can a Shareholder claim against a Company?

A shareholder can claim against a company under some circumstances. Shareholders have specific rights and interests in a company, and there are scenarios where they might have grounds to make a claim. Some common situations include: Breach of Shareholder Agreement: If...

Court of Appeal Clarifies GP’s Duty of Care in Varipatis v Almario

In a landmark decision, the New South Wales Court of Appeal upheld the appeal of a general practitioner (GP) who was previously found negligent for not referring a morbidly obese patient for bariatric surgery. The case, Varipatis v Almario [2013] NSWCA 76, provides...