Guo v Gao

In the matter of Guo v Gao, the court was asked to determine whether a declaration could be made that a person who has been missing for over 20 years, upon the presumption of death, is no longer alive. The dispute arose from the prolonged absence of a person last seen in April 2001. Extensive searches and enquiries were conducted in an attempt to locate the missing person, including by the NSW Police, but all attempts were unsuccessful. There was no evidence that the missing person was alive or dead, and no contact had been made with persons with whom the missing person would have been likely to communicate, including family members, her daughter, her siblings, her parents, her husband, and her former husband, the father of her daughter.

The court was required to decide whether the presumption of death could be relied upon to make a declaration that the missing person was no longer alive. The key issue was whether, in the absence of any evidence of the missing person's current status, it was appropriate to presume death and declare the person deceased. The court had to consider the principles of presumption of death and the standard of proof required in such cases.

The court concluded that it was appropriate to make a declaration of presumed death in this case. It found that the missing person had been absent for over 20 years, with no evidence of their current status or any contact with persons with whom they would have been likely to communicate. The court determined that the presumption of death could be relied upon, and the missing person was declared deceased. This decision was based on the extensive efforts made to locate the missing person, the absence of any evidence of their survival, and the length of time that had elapsed since their disappearance.

The court made a declaration that the missing person was presumed to be deceased as of the date of the determination. This decision provided clarity and finality to the status of the missing person and allowed for the administration of their estate to proceed accordingly. The court's reasoning was based on the principles of presumption of death and the lack of any evidence to suggest that the missing person was alive.