JOHNS & HIRST

In the matter of *Johns & Hirst*, heard before Judge Scarlett, the applicant sought the appointment of a litigation guardian. The respondent opposed this application. The core of the dispute concerned the applicant's capacity to conduct the substantive family law property proceedings and provide adequate instructions to their legal representatives.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant lacked the mental capacity to adequately conduct or give adequate instructions for the conduct of the proceeding, thereby necessitating the appointment of a litigation guardian. The court was required to apply the relevant legal test to determine if such an appointment was appropriate in the circumstances.

Judge Scarlett reasoned that the applicant did not possess the requisite capacity to manage the litigation. Applying the established legal principles for the appointment of a litigation guardian, the court found that the applicant was unable to adequately conduct or give adequate instructions for the conduct of the substantive proceeding. Consequently, the court ordered that Ms M, born in 1969, be appointed as the Litigation Guardian for the Applicant in this proceeding.