David & Anor v David

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal. The applicants, John Joseph Henry David and Jean Nelly Rea David (by her next friend, the Protective Commissioner), sought leave to appeal a decision concerning the management of the respondent's estate.

The central legal issue before the High Court was the interpretation of the *Protected Estates Act 1983* (NSW) and cognate legislation. Specifically, the Court was required to determine whether, after an order was made declaring a person incapable of managing their affairs and committing their estate to the management of the Protective Commissioner, that protected person retained the power to dispose of their estate.

The Court considered differing interpretations of the legislation. One view, expressed by Mr Justice Sheller, was that construing the Act as permitting the protected person to continue dealing with property under the Commissioner's management would contradict the plain meaning of sections 22A, 24, and 26. This interpretation suggested that Parliament could not have intended to grant the Commissioner authority to manage the estate while simultaneously allowing the protected person to defy that authority. Conversely, the President took the view that the language of sections 26 and 75 presented an insurmountable obstacle to the proposition that the Protective Commissioner must have sole management of the estate. The Court noted that the Act might lend itself to two constructions, with the majority adopting one and the minority another. The question of general public importance justifying special leave was raised, relating to a fundamental common law right to deal with one's property.