KPJ

Case [2019] QCAT 204


QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL


CITATION:

KPJ [2019] QCAT 204

PARTIES:

In applications about matters concerning KPJ

APPLICATION NO/S:

GAA2451-19

GAA4611-19

MATTER TYPE:

Guardianship and administration matters for adults

DELIVERED ON:

29 April 2019

HEARING DATE:

29 April 2019

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Bayne

ORDERS:

ADULT EVIDENCE ORDER

1.   The Tribunal orders that pursuant to s 106 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) relevant information may be obtained from KPJ in the absence of anyone else.

GUARDIANSHIP

2.   The Public Guardian is appointed as guardian for KPJ for the following personal matters:

(a)    Accommodation;

(b)    Provision of services, including in relation to the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

3.   This appointment remains current until further order of the Tribunal. The appointment is reviewable and is to be reviewed in one (1) year.

CATCHWORDS:

HEALTH LAW – GUARDIANSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF PROPERTY OF PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED CAPACITY – GUARDIANSHIP AND SIMILAR APPOINTMENTS presumption of capacity – conflicting evidence on capacity – whether presumption of capacity sufficiently rebutted – whether there is a requirement for a decision maker to be appointed – defunding of a funded service provider – impact on adult – NDIS funding

Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), s 5, s 7, s 12, s 14, s 15, Schedule 1, Schedule 4

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 46

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Adult:

KPJ

Public Guardian:

HB and ST

Public Trustee:

CF

Interested Person/s:

AJ – Advocate

SJ – DCDSSS

DeAT – DCDSS

GT – M

BJ – friend

WN – friend

O’FM - friend

REASONS FOR DECISION

  1. There were two applications before me on 29 April 2019:

    (a)one filed by the Public Trustee of Queensland seeking the appointment of a guardian for KPJ; and

    (b)one filed by KPJ’s advocate seeking an adult evidence order for him.

  2. From January to April 2019, KPJ had continually expressed his desire, and intent, to remain living in the residential arrangements at PA in which he had lived for some years and with his carer BJ with whom he had developed a close relationship.

  3. He had continued to argue adamantly that no details have ever been given to him as why he was moved, against his wishes, from this home. He has informed a number of parties, and this Tribunal, that no-one has ever explained to or discussed with him in any detail the reasons for the move: all he had been told was that his home at PA was ‘dangerous’ and ‘unsafe’ for him.

  4. KPJ considered that he will be found to have capacity (to make his own complex personal and health matters) at the QCAT hearing and would immediately move back into his home at PA in Brisbane.

Background

  1. KPJ, born on 21 March 2000, has been diagnosed with Arthrogryposis Multiplex Congenita; his functioning also complicated by epilepsy. KPJ relies on an electric wheelchair, hoist and access to a wheelchair-accessible motor vehicle, and will require full 24 hour care for all of his life.

Continue reading KPJ

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
KPJ [2019] QCAT 204
Case
[2019] QCAT 204
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved KPJ, a person who was the subject of a dispute concerning their capacity to manage their personal affairs and property. The matter was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT), which was tasked with determining the legal issues surrounding the presumption of capacity and the necessity of appointing a decision maker for KPJ. The conflict centred on whether the presumption of capacity had been sufficiently rebutted and whether a guardian was required to manage KPJ's personal matters and services, including those related to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).

The primary legal issue before QCAT was whether the evidence presented was sufficient to rebut the presumption of capacity under the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld). Additionally, the Tribunal had to determine if there was a necessity for a decision maker to be appointed for KPJ's personal matters, specifically regarding accommodation and the provision of services. The court also considered the implications of defunding a funded service provider on KPJ and the impact on their access to NDIS funding.

QCAT found that the evidence provided was sufficient to rebut the presumption of capacity, leading to the conclusion that a guardian was necessary for KPJ's personal matters. The Tribunal appointed the Public Guardian as the guardian for KPJ, responsible for managing their accommodation and the provision of services, including those associated with the NDIS. This decision was made to ensure KPJ's welfare and the appropriate management of their affairs. The Public Guardian's appointment is set to remain in effect until further order by the Tribunal, with a mandatory review scheduled for one year after the appointment.

In light of the findings, QCAT issued orders permitting the Public Guardian to obtain relevant information from KPJ in their absence. Furthermore, the Tribunal appointed the Public Guardian as the guardian for KPJ's personal matters, with the appointment set to be reviewed after one year. This decision aimed to safeguard KPJ's interests and ensure the provision of necessary services, including those related to the NDIS.

Orders

Orders of the court

ADULT EVIDENCE ORDER

1. The Tribunal orders that pursuant to s 106 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) relevant information may be obtained from KPJ in the absence of anyone else.

GUARDIANSHIP

2. The Public Guardian is appointed as guardian for KPJ for the following personal matters:

(a) Accommodation;

(b) Provision of services, including in relation to the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

3. This appointment remains current until further order of the Tribunal. The appointment is reviewable and is to be reviewed in one (1) year.

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.