Administrative Decisions Tribunal
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: AF v Roads and Maritime Services (No 2) [2012] NSWADT 210 Hearing dates: On the papers Decision date: 16 October 2012 Jurisdiction: General Division Before: P H Molony, Judicial Member Decision: 1. Pursuant to s 71(4) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 the Tribunal being, satisfied that AF is an incapacitated person within the meaning of s 71(7)(b,) appoints a guardian from the guardian ad litem panel to represent AF in these proceedings.
2. Liberty to apply with respect to hearing dates.
Catchwords: Incapacity - appointment of representative - guardian ad litem Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Cases Cited: AF v RTA [2009] NSWADT 274
AF v Minister for Health; Minister for Health v AF [2012] NSWADTAP 16
Crewdson v Central Sydney AHS [2002] NSWCA 345
Dezfouli v Corrective Services [2011] NSWADT 11
GA v The University of Sydney (GD) [2010] NSWADTAP 31
Roads and Maritime Services v AF; AF v Roads and Maritime Services (GD) [2011] NSWADTAP 63
Slaveski v State of Victoria and Others [2009] VSC 596
NZ v State of New South Wales (Department of Housing) [2009] NSWADT 165Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: AF (Applicant, in person)
Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)Representation: AF (Applicant, in person)
King and Wood Mallesons (Respondent)
File Number(s): 073135 and 073275
REASONS FOR DECISION
Introduction
These reasons for decision consider whether or not the Tribunal should appoint a person to represent AF in proceedings that she has brought in the Tribunal under the Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998, despite AF objecting to such an appointment. AF filed two applications with respect to 7 separate privacy complaints.
In these reasons the names of private individuals have been anonymised to protect their privacy.
The relevant law
Section 71 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 relevantly provides -
(4) If it appears to the Tribunal that a party is an incapacitated person, the Tribunal may appoint any other person the Tribunal thinks fit to represent the party.
(5) Anything done or omitted to be done by a member of the Guardian Ad Litem Panel who is appointed by the Tribunal under subsection (4) to represent a party to the proceedings who is an incapacitated person does not subject the member personally to any action, liability, claim or demand if the thing was done, or omitted to be done, in good faith for the purpose of representing the incapacitated person.
(5A) However, any such liability attaches instead to the Crown.
...
(7)In this section:
Guardian Ad Litem Panel means the panel constituted as the Guardian Ad Litem Panel by the Director-General of the Department of Justice and Attorney General.
incapacitated person means:
(a) a minor, or
(b) a person who is totally or partially incapable of representing himself or herself in proceedings before the Tribunal because the person is intellectually, physically, psychologically or sensorily disabled, of advanced age, a mentally incapacitated person or otherwise disabled, or
(c)…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read AF v Roads and Maritime Services (No 2) and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2012] NSWADT 210
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues the court had to address included whether AF was indeed incapacitated as defined under the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 and whether a guardian ad litem should be appointed to represent AF. The court was required to ensure that AF's rights and interests were adequately protected in the proceedings.
The Tribunal found that AF met the criteria for an incapacitated person as per section 71(7)(b) of the Act. The court held that AF's incapacity necessitated the appointment of a guardian to represent them in the proceedings. The Tribunal appointed a guardian from the guardian ad litem panel to act on behalf of AF, ensuring that their interests were safeguarded throughout the case. The court also granted liberty to apply regarding hearing dates, allowing for flexibility in scheduling the proceedings to accommodate the needs of the incapacitated party.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Pursuant to s 71(4) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 the Tribunal being, satisfied that AF is an incapacitated person within the meaning of s 71(7)(b,) appoints a guardian from the guardian ad litem panel to represent AF in these proceedings.
2. Liberty to apply with respect to hearing dates.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.