KKD

Case [2019] NSWCATGD 4


NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: KKD [2019] NSWCATGD 4
Hearing dates: 21 January 2019
Date of orders: 21 January 2019
Decision date: 21 January 2019
Jurisdiction:Guardianship Division
Before: J Claridge, Senior Member (Legal)
L Houlahan, Senior Member (Professional)
L Porter, General Member (Community)
Decision:

1. A guardianship order is made for KKD.

 

2. TMW of [Appendix removed from publication.] is appointed as the guardian.

 

3. This is a continuing guardianship order for a period of one year from 21 January 2019.

 

4. This is a limited guardianship order giving the guardian(s) custody of KKD to the extent necessary to carry out the functions below.

 

FUNCTIONS:

 

5. The guardian has the following function:

 

a) Restrictive Practices

 

To make decisions about the following restrictive practices as outlined in KKD’s Interim Behaviour Support Plan dated 9 November 2018:

 

Environmental restraint: restricted access to kitchen including refrigerator to prevent excessive consumption of food and drinks;

 

Environmental restraint: locked doors and gates to prevent KKD leaving to engage in food seeking behaviours; and

 

Chemical restraint: routine use of psychotropic medication.

 

CONDITIONS:

 

6. The conditions of this order are:

 

a) Standard Condition

 

In exercising this role the guardian shall take all reasonable steps to bring KKD to an understanding of the issues and to obtain and consider his views before making significant decisions.

 

b) Restrictive Practices Condition

 

The guardian may only consent to:

 

i) Restriction of KKD’s freedom of movement;

 

ii) The administration of psychotropic medication; or

 

iii) Other restrictive practices

 to address challenging behaviours within the context of the implementation of a comprehensive positive behaviour intervention and support plan (or within the context of positive programming addressing KKD’s lifestyle and skills development needs).
Catchwords:

GUARDIANSHIP – application for a guardianship order – functions of guardian – guardianship order made – appointment of a private guardian

  RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES – definition and nature of restrictive practices – relationship between restrictive practices and NDIS – chemical restraint – environmental restraint
Legislation Cited: Guardianship Act 1987 (NSW), ss 3(1)–(2), 4, 14(1)–(2), 15(3), 17(1), 18(1)
National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth), s 9
National Disability Insurance Scheme (Restrictive Practices and Behaviour Support) Rules 2018 (Cth), r 6
Cases Cited: Nil
Texts Cited: Nil
Category:Principal judgment
Parties:

009: Guardianship Application

  KKD (the person)
TMW (applicant)
Public Guardian
Representation: Nil
File Number(s): NCAT 2004/00262556
Publication restriction: Decisions of the Guardianship Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal have been anonymised to remove any information that may identify any person involved in the Tribunal’s proceedings (s 65, Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)).

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

  1. KKD is 44 years old and lives in a group home in Northwest Sydney.

  2. He is supported by his mother, TMW.

  3. It is reported that KKD has an intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder.

  4. On 9 March 2017, the NSW Trustee and Guardian was appointed to manage KKD’s estate.

  5. On 22 November 2018, the Tribunal received an application for guardianship for KKD from TMW.

Continue reading KKD

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
KKD [2019] NSWCATGD 4
Case
[2019] NSWCATGD 4
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of KKD, the court was presented with an application for a guardianship order. The applicant sought the appointment of a guardian to make decisions on behalf of KKD, who has specific needs related to restrictive practices, including environmental and chemical restraints. The court was tasked with determining whether such a guardianship order should be granted and who should be appointed as the guardian.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether a guardianship order should be made for KKD and, if so, who should be appointed as the guardian. Additionally, the court needed to delineate the specific functions and conditions that would govern the guardian’s authority, particularly regarding the restrictive practices outlined in KKD's Interim Behaviour Support Plan. The court had to balance the need for protective measures with KKD's rights and best interests.

The court found that the application for a guardianship order was appropriate, considering KKD's specific needs and the benefits of having a guardian to make informed decisions on their behalf. The court appointed TMW as the guardian, noting their suitability for the role. The guardianship order was made for a period of one year, with specific functions assigned to the guardian, including the authority to make decisions about restrictive practices as outlined in KKD's Interim Behaviour Support Plan. The court also imposed conditions on the guardian's authority, requiring them to consider KKD's views and ensure that any restrictive practices are implemented within the context of a positive behaviour support plan. The court emphasised the importance of respecting KKD's rights and promoting their well-being.

The final orders included the making of a guardianship order for KKD, the appointment of TMW as the guardian, and the specification of the guardian's functions and conditions, particularly concerning the use of restrictive practices.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. A guardianship order is made for KKD.

2. TMW of [Appendix removed from publication.] is appointed as the guardian.

3. This is a continuing guardianship order for a period of one year from 21 January 2019.

4. This is a limited guardianship order giving the guardian(s) custody of KKD to the extent necessary to carry out the functions below.

FUNCTIONS:

5. The guardian has the following function:

a) Restrictive Practices

To make decisions about the following restrictive practices as outlined in KKD’s Interim Behaviour Support Plan dated 9 November 2018:

Environmental restraint: restricted access to kitchen including refrigerator to prevent excessive consumption of food and drinks;

Environmental restraint: locked doors and gates to prevent KKD leaving to engage in food seeking behaviours; and

Chemical restraint: routine use of psychotropic medication.

CONDITIONS:

6. The conditions of this order are:

a) Standard Condition

In exercising this role the guardian shall take all reasonable steps to bring KKD to an understanding of the issues and to obtain and consider his views before making significant decisions.

b) Restrictive Practices Condition

The guardian may only consent to:

i) Restriction of KKD’s freedom of movement;

ii) The administration of psychotropic medication; or

iii) Other restrictive practices

to address challenging behaviours within the context of the implementation of a comprehensive positive behaviour intervention and support plan (or within the context of positive programming addressing KKD’s lifestyle and skills development needs).

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.