Fs

The matter before the Court involved an appeal against a decision of the Mental Health Review Tribunal, which had appointed a plenary administrator for Mr S, an Aboriginal man, under the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990. The Tribunal had determined that Mr S had a mental disability, which impaired his ability to make reasonable judgments in respect of his estate. The Court was required to consider whether the Tribunal had correctly applied the statutory criteria for appointing a plenary administrator.

In determining the appeal, the Court held that the test for making a reasonable judgment has both objective and subjective elements. The Court emphasised that a reasonable judgment is the outcome of a process that involves knowledge, understanding, and evaluation. The Court further held that the test for appointing a plenary administrator under the Act requires the Tribunal to consider the extent to which a person with a mental disability is able to engage in the cognitive process that culminates in an ability to make a reasonable judgment, and then to set that ability against the requirements of the person's individual estate and circumstances.

The Court found that the Tribunal had correctly applied the statutory criteria for appointing a plenary administrator. The Tribunal had considered the evidence of Mr S's cognitive deficits and had concluded that his ability to make reasonable judgments in respect of his estate was impaired. The Court held that the Tribunal's decision was not unreasonable and that the appeal should be dismissed.

The Court made the following orders: (1) The order appointing a plenary administrator for Mr S's estate is confirmed; (2) The Public Trustee is to pay a weekly allowance to Mr S; (3) The Public Trustee is to send annual statements to Mr S and those persons acting in his affairs; and (4) The order is to be reviewed by 30 March 2008.