HSE

[2018] QCAT 286

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

HSE [2018] QCAT 286

PARTIES:

In applications about matters concerning HSE

APPLICATION NO/S:

GAA1964-18; GAA5959-18; GAA5960-18

MATTER TYPE:

Guardianship and administration matters for adults

DELIVERED ON:

Date of orders 30 July 2018

Reasons delivered on 22 August 2018

HEARING DATE:

30 July 2018

HEARD AT:

Southport

DECISION OF:

Member Joachim

ORDERS:

CONFLICT TRANSACTION

1.   [Redacted].

2.   [Redacted].

LIMITATION ORDERS

3. The Tribunal orders that pursuant to s 108 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 publication of information about the decision and reasons for decision is prohibited.

4. The Tribunal orders that pursuant to s 109 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 the following information/documents are confidential and must not be disclosed to BLR, a legal representative of BLR and all other persons associated with BLR:

a)   All documents on the Tribunal file after the confidentiality order made on 14 September 2017.

CATCHWORDS:

GUARDIANS, COMMITTEES, ADMINISTRATORS, MANAGERS AND RECEIVERS – OTHER MATTERS – where adult wishes her financial affairs to be kept confidential from former partner – where adult is in litigation with former partner – whether limitation orders should be made

Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), s 100, s 108, s 109, s 110

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

Self-represented

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. The Tribunal has before it an application for an authorisation of a conflict transaction from HSE’s administrator, WL. The Tribunal made various directions in relation to this matter prior to hearing. The Tribunal also made a limitation order on 11 June 2018, prior to the hearing, that pursuant to s 109 and s 110 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) (‘GAA Act’) all documents on the Tribunal’s file after the confidentiality order made on 14 September 2017 are confidential and must not be disclosed to BLR, a legal representative of BLR, and all other persons associated with BLR.

2. BLR is a former partner of HSE. When the Tribunal makes a confidentiality order prior to a hearing, the matter must be considered afresh at the hearing.

3. At the hearing on 30 July 2018, when the application for an authorisation of a conflict transaction was hearing, the Tribunal considered the application for the confidentiality order, and also an application for a non-publication order. These latter two applications were initiated by the Tribunal.

4. A confidentiality order and a non-publication order are limitation orders under s 100 of the GAA Act. A non-publication order can be made under s 108, whereas a confidentiality order can be made under s 109. Both provisions are such that the Tribunal may, to the extent necessary, prohibit publication of information about a Tribunal hearing, or withhold from an active party or other person a document or part of a document before the Tribunal. This can be done in both instances to avoid serious harm or injustice to a person.

5. Any person may inspect documents filed in the Tribunal registry, subject in some cases to paying a fee. However, the general right to inspect file documents can be displaced by some form of confidentiality order. The Tribunal considered, in relation to this matter, that HSE was very concerned that her personal and financial information could be made available to her ex-partner, with whom she is in significant litigation in the Family Court in respect of a property settlement.

6. In my opinion, it was necessary to ensure that no injustice to HSE was caused by revealing sensitive information to her former partner, prejudicing her case such that I found it necessary to make a confidentiality order over material that had been provided to the Tribunal since 14 September 2017.

7. I also decided that it was necessary to make a non-publication order in respect of the Tribunal’s reasons for decision and the Tribunal decision in the substantive matter, that is so that the former partner is not able to access orders made by the Tribunal nor its reasons for decision, as again I consider it is not in the interests of justice for him to have access to her information, given the significant litigation in the Family Court. I am also satisfied that HSE would suffer significant distress if he had access to her personal and financial information which is on the Tribunal files.