CM v Protective Commissioner

Case [2007] NSWADT 287



CITATION: CM and ors v Protective Commissioner [2007] NSWADT 287
DIVISION: General Division
PARTIES:

FIRST APPLICANTS
CM and CN

SECOND APPLICANT
CO

RESPONDENT
Protective Commissioner
FILE NUMBER: 073281
HEARING DATES: 9 November 2007
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 9 November 2007
 
DATE OF DECISION: 

13 December 2007
BEFORE: Leal S - Judicial Member
CATCHWORDS: Protected Estates Act - Protective Commissioner - powers as to property
MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter
LEGISLATION CITED: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997
Guardianship Act 1987
CASES CITED: Protective Commissioner v ‘D’ & ors [2004] NSWCA 216
REPRESENTATION:

In person

C Phang, solicitor
ORDERS: The decision of the Protective Commissioner to sell the Granville property by public auction, so that all members of the client’s family can compete for the property if they so desire, is affirmed.

Section 126 provides

(1A) This section applies only to the following:


    (a) proceedings in the Community Services Division of the Tribunal,

    (b) appeals to an Appeal Panel from a decision made by the Tribunal in the Community Services Division,

    (b1) proceedings in relation to an external appeal made under section 67A of the Guardianship Act 1987 or section 21A of the Protected Estates Act 1983,

    (b2) proceedings in relation to a reviewable decision made under the Guardianship Act 1987 or the Protected Estates Act 1983

    (c) such other proceedings (or class or classes of proceedings) as may be prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this section.

(1) A person must not, except with the consent of the Tribunal, publish or broadcast the name of any person:


    (a) who appears as a witness before the Tribunal in any proceedings, or

    (b) to whom any proceedings before the Tribunal relate, or

    (c) who is mentioned or otherwise involved in any proceedings before the Tribunal,

whether before or after the proceedings are disposed of.

Maximum penalty: 10 penalty units or imprisonment for 12 months, or both.

(2) This section does not prohibit the publication or broadcasting of an official report of the proceedings that includes the name of any person the publication or broadcasting of which would otherwise be prohibited by this section.

(3) For the purposes of this section, a reference to the name of a person includes a reference to any information, picture or other material that identifies the person or is likely to lead to the identification of the person.


Introduction

1 CX is an 81 year old man with dementia who has been living in nursing home accommodation since April 2005. He has two daughters and two sons. One son, ‘CO’ and another son ‘CM’ and his wife ‘CN’ are the Applicants in this review (‘the Applicants’).

2 CX owns a property in Granville NSW (‘the Granville property’). Prior to his admission into the nursing home, CX’s daughter R had been living with and caring for CX. Following his admission to the nursing home, R had continued to live, rent-free, in the Granville property. Her own neighbouring property is, according to the Applicants, currently tenanted.

3 In June 2005,…

Continue reading CM v Protective Commissioner

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
CM v Protective Commissioner [2007] NSWADT 287
Case
[2007] NSWADT 287
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of CM v Protective Commissioner involves a dispute concerning the sale of a property under the provisions of the Protected Estates Act. The dispute was brought before the court by CM, who challenged the decision of the Protective Commissioner to sell the Granville property by public auction. The client's family, including CM, sought to contest the sale to ensure they could compete for the property if they chose to do so. The matter was heard in the court with jurisdiction over administrative decisions.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the decision of the Protective Commissioner to sell the Granville property by public auction was lawful and appropriate under the Protected Estates Act. CM argued that the sale mechanism did not adequately allow all members of the client's family to compete for the property, potentially disadvantaging them. The court had to determine whether the Commissioner's decision was within the scope of their statutory powers and if the decision was reasonable and just.

In reaching its decision, the court examined the statutory framework and the powers conferred upon the Protective Commissioner under the Protected Estates Act. The court noted that the Commissioner's decision to sell the property by public auction was intended to provide an open and competitive process that allowed all interested parties, including family members, to participate. The court held that the Commissioner's decision was within the bounds of their statutory authority and was a reasonable and appropriate exercise of their powers. The court found that the sale by public auction ensured transparency and equal opportunity for all family members to compete for the property, which aligned with the objectives of the Act.

Consequently, the court affirmed the decision of the Protective Commissioner to sell the Granville property by public auction. The court's decision is subject to the application of section 126 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997, which provides for the review of the decision. The ruling ensures that the property sale proceeds in a manner that is fair and in accordance with the legislative intent of the Protected Estates Act.

Orders

Orders of the court

The decision of the Protective Commissioner to sell the Granville property by public auction, so that all members of the client's family can compete for the property if they so desire, is affirmed. Section 126 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 applies to this decision.

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.