HP

[2012] QCAT 458

CITATION: HP [2012] QCAT 458

PARTIES: HP

APPLICATION NUMBER: GAA5121-12

MATTER TYPE: Guardianship and administration matters for adults

HEARING DATE: 29 June 2012

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: R Joachim, Member

DELIVERED ON: 29 June 2012

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE: 1.    The application for an interim order for HP is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

GUARDIANSHIP – Interim order – where service provider considers guardian’s decisions placing adult at serious risk – where Tribunal held early hearing

Guardianship and Administration Act 2000, s 129

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009 (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. HP is a young man with an acquired brain injury who, at the time of the application, received services from Able Care.  HP was receiving 24 hour support from that organisation.  The Tribunal has had previous hearings for HP and at the time of the application there was a containment and seclusion approval in place along with the approval of other restrictive practices. 

2. On 22 June 2012 Natalie Hennessy, the director of Able Care, applied to the Tribunal for an interim order in respect of HP. 

3. Ms Hennessy sought the appointment of the Adult Guardian for decisions about accommodation, service provision and the use of restrictive practices replacing HP’s sister SE.  She also sought an order that HP not move due to serious risk of harm, that the service model and provider for HP remain the same pending completion of the Centre of Excellence report and the implementation of the recommendations and that the service model and provider for HP do not change until the next scheduled Tribunal date in August.  The August date referred to by Ms Hennessy was to conduct a review of the containment and seclusion approval.

4. This is an application under s 129 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000. The Tribunal can make an interim order if there is an immediate risk of harm to the health, welfare or property of the adult concerned in an application including the risk of abuse, exploitation or self neglect. The Tribunal may make an interim order in the proceedings without a hearing in deciding the proceeding or otherwise compliant with the requirements of the Act.

5. The thrust of Ms Hennessy’s application is that the current guardian, SE, is proposing to move her brother HP to a new service provider at the Gold Coast.  She believes that HP will be placed at serious risk of physical and emotional harm by 1 July, that he will be neglected and his support needs will not be able to be met from 1 July and that he will be at risk of seizures requiring medical support and members of the community and carers are at serious risk of harm.  In her application she considers the decisions of the guardian are inadequate and there is a risk of HP being subjected to physical restraint and unauthorised seclusion. 

6. Because of the serious allegations made against the guardian in the supporting material the Tribunal decided to conduct an urgent hearing of the matter rather than make an interim order.  To that end the Tribunal conducted a hearing on 29 June 2012 prior to the proposed move which the applicant considered posed a risk to HP.  As a result of this there was no need for an interim order and none was subsequently made.