Supreme Court
New South Wales
- Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: AW v WW [2023] NSWSC 724 Hearing dates: 26, 27 June 2023 Date of orders: 27 June 2023 Decision date: 27 June 2023 Jurisdiction: Equity - Protective List Before: Lindsay J Decision: Order that the plaintiff’s application (under clause 14(1)(b) of Schedule 6 to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 NSW) for leave to appeal against a decision of the Guardianship Division of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal on a ground other than a question of law be dismissed.
Catchwords: GUARDIANSHIP – Guardians, committees, administrators, managers and receivers – Appeal from dismissal by NCAT of applications for the appointment of a guardian and a financial manager.
APPEALS – Appeal to Court from Guardianship Division of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal – Application for leave to appeal on a ground other than a question of law dismissed - Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 NSW, Schedule 6, clause 14(1)(b).
Legislation Cited: Australian Courts Act 1828 (Imp)
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 NSW
Guardianship Act 1987 NSW
New South Wales Act 1823 (Imp)
Powers of Attorney Act 2003 NSW
Surveillance Devices Supreme Court Act 1970
Cases Cited: P v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2015] NSWSC 579
Secretary, Department of Health and Community Services v JWB and SMB (Marion’s Case) (1992) 175 CLR 218
Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Plaintiff: AW (a son)
Defendant: WW (a mother)Representation: Counsel:
Plaintiff: Miles Condon SC and Irina Hoskinson
Defendant: RD Marshall SC and N OlsonSolicitors:
Plaintiff: Swan Lawyers
Defendant: MacRae Lawyers
File Number(s): 2023/00080280
JUDGMENT
-
The plaintiff in these proceedings is the adult son (and only child) of the defendant, an 89 year old widow whose husband died in 2015.
-
On 3 February 2021 the defendant revoked an appointment of the plaintiff as her enduring attorney and on 6 February 2021 appointed an accountant (“JM”) as her new enduring attorney pursuant to the provisions of the Powers of Attorney Act 2003 NSW.
-
On 8 October 2021 the plaintiff lodged with the Guardianship Division of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (“NCAT”) applications (under the Guardianship Act 1987 NSW) for the appointment of a guardian and a financial manager for the defendant.
-
On 19 October 2021 the defendant executed an enduring guardianship appointment (under the Guardianship Act 1987) appointing “KB” (a retired solicitor and cousin by marriage) and “KS” (a solicitor) as her guardians jointly and severally.
-
There is no challenge to the validity of the defendant’s appointments of enduring agents, but the plaintiff contends that, if the defendant’s best interests are to be served, those appointments should be displaced, respectively, by the appointment of a financial manager and the appointment of a guardian.
-
By orders made on 28 November 2022 (supported by reasons for decision published on 10 February 2023), the Tribunal dismissed both applications of the plaintiff.
-
By a summons filed on 17 March 2023 (and amended on 7 June 2023) the plaintiff appeals from those orders to this Court…
Continue reading AW v WW
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- AW v WW [2023] NSWSC 724
- Case
- [2023] NSWSC 724
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court included whether the NCAT had erred in its assessment of XY's capacity to manage their own affairs and whether the NCAT had adequately considered the necessity for the appointment of a guardian and a financial manager. The court had to determine if the NCAT's findings were supported by the evidence presented and whether the NCAT had correctly applied the relevant statutory provisions. The applicants contended that the NCAT had misunderstood the evidence regarding XY's capacity and had not appropriately weighed the risks associated with not appointing a guardian and a financial manager.
The court held that the NCAT's decision was not in error. The evidence presented did not demonstrate that XY lacked the capacity to manage their own affairs to the extent required for the appointment of a guardian. Furthermore, the court found that the NCAT had correctly assessed the risks and had adequately considered the necessity for the appointment of a guardian and a financial manager. The court concluded that the NCAT's findings were supported by the evidence and that there was no basis for the applicants' contentions. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed. The court upheld the NCAT's decision, finding no merit in the applicants' arguments.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.