AG v AP-G

The case of AG v AP-G involves an application by the Attorney-General for the appointment of a financial manager for AP-G, a minor, due to incapacity to manage their own affairs by reason of their youth. The application was made under section 41(1) of the NSW Trustee and Guardian Act 2009, seeking an order that would remain in effect until AP-G reached the age of majority. Additionally, the Attorney-General sought an order under section 64(1) that AP-G be informed of their right to apply to the court to revoke the order before attaining majority. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the court had the authority to make an order under section 41 until AP-G reached the age of majority and whether the court could issue an order under section 64(1) to ensure AP-G was aware of their right to apply to revoke the order prior to reaching majority. The court also had to consider whether to restrict the powers of the trustee of a settlement for the benefit of the minor under section 16 of the Infants' Custody and Settlements Act 1899.

The court found that the provisions of the Trustee and Guardian Act and the Infants' Custody and Settlements Act were designed to protect minors and ensure their best interests were served. The court concluded that it had the authority to make an order under section 41 until AP-G reached majority, as this was necessary to safeguard AP-G’s financial interests. Regarding section 64(1), the court determined that it was appropriate to include a provision ensuring AP-G was informed of their right to apply to revoke the order before reaching majority, thereby facilitating transparency and enabling AP-G to exercise their rights. Additionally, the court exercised its discretion to restrict the trustee's powers of investment to ensure prudent management of the minor's assets.

The court made an order appointing a financial manager for AP-G until they attained majority, informed AP-G of their right to apply to revoke the order before reaching majority, and restricted the trustee's powers of investment in accordance with the court's directions.