AC
[2005] WASAT 195
•8 AUGUST 2005
AC [2005] WASAT 195
| STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL | Citation No: | [2005] WASAT 195 | |
| GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 1990 (WA) | |||
| Case No: | GAA:430/2005 | 16 JUNE 2005 | |
| Coram: | JUSTICE M L BARKER (PRESIDENT) MS D DEAN (MEMBER) MR J JAMES (SENIOR SESSIONAL MEMBER) | 8/08/05 | |
| 6 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Guardianship orders affirmed; review application dismissed and further order made | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | MR AC |
Catchwords: | Guardianship Capacity Need Passport retention Travel restriction |
Legislation: | Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA), s 17A |
Case References: | RE AC [2005] WASAT 139 Nil |
JURISDICTION : STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL STREAM : HUMAN RIGHTS ACT : GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 1990 (WA) CITATION : AC [2005] WASAT 195 MEMBER : JUSTICE M L BARKER (PRESIDENT)
- MS D DEAN (MEMBER)
MR J JAMES (SENIOR SESSIONAL MEMBER)
- Applicant
Catchwords:
Guardianship - Capacity - Need - Passport retention - Travel restriction
Legislation:
Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA), s 17A
Result:
Guardianship orders affirmed; review application dismissed and further order made
(Page 2)
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Applicant : Self-represented
Solicitors:
Applicant : Self-represented
Case(s) referred to in decision(s):
AC [2005] WASAT 139
Case(s) also cited:
Nil
(Page 3)
Summary of Tribunal's decision
1 The applicant (AC) applied to the Full Tribunal under s 17A of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) to review the orders of a single member of the Tribunal that maintained the Public Trustee as plenary administrator of his estate for a further five years and appointed the Public Advocate as his limited guardian with authority to decide when and upon what conditions he might travel outside Australia, and to hold his passport.
2 AC desired to travel to China. To that end, he wished to control his own finances, to obtain his passport or apply for a new passport, and then to make travel arrangements to visit China.
3 The Full Tribunal found there was no reason to change the orders made by the single member. The Full Tribunal fully agreed with the single member that the evidence before the Tribunal confirmed that AC has long standing delusional beliefs that he was born simultaneously in China and the United Kingdom, and that he speaks of having a wife and children in a remote province of North-West China.
4 The Full Tribunal considered, as had the single member, that the Public Advocate, as the limited guardian of AC, would be able to assist AC with the help of social workers and his medical practitioners, in deciding if and when a visit to China by AC may be appropriate.
Introduction
5 On 4 April 2005 a single member of the Tribunal heard an application under the Guardian and Administration Act 1990 (WA) (Act) in respect of AC. Upon being satisfied that he was in need of an administrator and guardian, the member made the following orders:
(1) the appointment of the Public Trustee as plenary administrator for AC be confirmed for a further five years; and
(2) the Public Advocate be appointed as limited guardian for AC with authority to decide when and upon what conditions AC shall travel outside of Australia and, to this end, to hold his passport.
(Page 4)
6 The member who made these orders published her reasons for decision for doing so: they may be found on the Tribunal's website database, reported as RE: AC [2005] WASAT 139.
7 The reasons for decisions of the member set out in some detail the background to the orders made in April and, in particular, why it was necessary for the Public Advocate to be appointed as limited guardian for AC with authority to decide when and upon what conditions he might travel outside of Australia and, to that end, to hold his passport.
8 Following the decision of the Tribunal in April, AC applied, as he was entitled to do, for a review of the decision of the single member of the Tribunal by a Full Tribunal pursuant to s 17A of the Act.
9 On 16 June 2005 the s 17A review application was heard by the Full Tribunal comprising the President and two other members of the Tribunal.
10 After hearing from the applicant, Mr Cake and Mr McVeigh, and from the representative of the Public Trustee and the representative of the Public Advocate, the Tribunal affirmed the earlier orders of the Tribunal and made a further order to the effect that the Public Trustee should give AC's birth certificate to the Public Advocate for safe keeping.
11 Rather than repeat the evidence that the Full Tribunal received at the review hearing, it is sufficient to say that all of the statements concerning background, capacity, evidence and need made in the member's reasons, were found by the Full Tribunal to continue to be relevant.
12 AC has, as the member earlier found, fixed paranoid delusions. He holds long standing delusional beliefs that he was simultaneously born in Xinjiang, China and in Manchester, United Kingdom. He talks of having a wife and children in a remote province in North-West China. He has made numerous plans through travel agents and airlines to travel to China.
13 Before the Full Tribunal, AC made it clear that he still wished to travel to China. All the evidence before the Full Tribunal continues to suggest that it is still appropriate for the Public Advocate to be the limited guardian of AC with authority to decide when and upon what conditions AC might travel outside of Australia.
14 The only circumstance that appeared to have changed between the time of the hearing before the member in April 2005 and the hearing in June 2005 before the Full Tribunal, was that AC's passport appeared to have expired. It would therefore be necessary for him to apply for a new
(Page 5)
- passport if he were to travel outside Australia. To that end, it would be necessary for an application for a new Australian passport, most probably, to be made by or on AC's behalf. For the passport to be issued, it would be necessary for the birth certificate of AC to be produced to the relevant authorities. It transpires that the birth certificate has been held by the Public Trustee as AC's administrator. It seems to the Tribunal to be more appropriate, in all the circumstances, that such a document should now be held by AC's limited guardian, the Public Advocate. For that reason, the Full Tribunal further ordered that the Public Trustee provide AC's birth certificate to the Public Advocate.
Conclusion
15 As a result of the review hearing, the situation is that, whether or not AC should at some point travel to China or any other place outside Australia, is a decision to be taken by AC's limited guardian, the Public Advocate, in conjunction with AC and other persons familiar with AC's circumstances. The view as expressed at the hearing is that perhaps, in time, and if AC's medical advisors were to agree, and if he were suitably chaperoned, it may become possible for AC to visit China in accordance with his desires. However, that is a matter that will require very careful consideration by the Public Advocate and is not a decision that should be rushed. Apart from anything else, as AC acknowledged at the hearing, his financial circumstances may make it difficult for him to make his cherished visit to China.
16 In the circumstances, the Full Tribunal considered that there were no grounds to change the terms of the existing orders made by the member.
Order
17 The orders of the single member of the Tribunal were affirmed and the application of AC for a review under s 17A of the Act was dismissed.
18 The only other order made was that the Public Trustee should provide AC's birth certificate to the Public Advocate in her capacity as limited guardian of AC.
(Page 6)
- I certify that this and the preceding [18] paragraphs comprise the reasons for decision of the State Administrative Tribunal.
___________________________________
JUSTICE M L BARKER, PRESIDENT
0