Klewer and National Disability Insurance Agency
Case
•
[2019] AATA 4974
•25 November 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Klewer and National Disability Insurance Agency [2019] AATA 4974
[2019] AATA 4974
25 November 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter came before the National Disability Insurance Tribunal concerning an application for review of a statement of participant supports. The applicant, a participant in the National Disability Insurance Scheme, was represented by his mother, Ms Klewer. The National Disability Insurance Agency, the respondent, raised concerns regarding Ms Klewer's representation, particularly in light of her prior findings as a vexatious litigant by the Supreme Court of New South Wales.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether it possessed the power to appoint a guardian ad litem for the applicant. This question arose in the context of ensuring the applicant's best interests were served and that procedural fairness was afforded to the respondent, given the applicant's mother's history and her potential conflict of interest as both representative and potential beneficiary of the supports.
The Deputy President, John Pascoe AC CVO, noted that Ms Klewer's insistence on representing her son, despite her potential conflict of interest and her history of vexatious litigation, raised significant concerns. The Deputy President referred to the findings of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which had previously determined that Ms Klewer habitually and persistently instituted vexatious legal proceedings without reasonable cause. These findings highlighted her inability to distinguish between allegations and evidence, her refusal to accept adverse decisions, and her failure to comprehend the reasons for the failure of her applications. The Deputy President found Ms Klewer's conduct before the Tribunal to be rude, obdurate, and at times threatening, further underscoring the need for an independent representative.
The Tribunal held the matter in abeyance pending the appointment of a guardian ad litem to represent the applicant's best interests.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether it possessed the power to appoint a guardian ad litem for the applicant. This question arose in the context of ensuring the applicant's best interests were served and that procedural fairness was afforded to the respondent, given the applicant's mother's history and her potential conflict of interest as both representative and potential beneficiary of the supports.
The Deputy President, John Pascoe AC CVO, noted that Ms Klewer's insistence on representing her son, despite her potential conflict of interest and her history of vexatious litigation, raised significant concerns. The Deputy President referred to the findings of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which had previously determined that Ms Klewer habitually and persistently instituted vexatious legal proceedings without reasonable cause. These findings highlighted her inability to distinguish between allegations and evidence, her refusal to accept adverse decisions, and her failure to comprehend the reasons for the failure of her applications. The Deputy President found Ms Klewer's conduct before the Tribunal to be rude, obdurate, and at times threatening, further underscoring the need for an independent representative.
The Tribunal held the matter in abeyance pending the appointment of a guardian ad litem to represent the applicant's best interests.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Judicial Review
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
-
Abuse of Process
-
Jurisdiction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Klewer v National Disability Insurance Agency (Litigation Representative) [2020] FCA 1430
Cases Citing This Decision
3
XHKD and Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs (Migration)
[2021] AATA 2948
Danher and National Disability Insurance Agency
[2021] AATA 332
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
0
Klewer v Sydney Children's Hospital Specialty Network
[2015] NSWSC 1493
Luck and Department of Human Services
[2009] AATA 800
Sullivan v Civil Aviation Safety Authority
[2014] FCAFC 93