KS (2)

The case involved KS, who applied to intervene in an enduring power of attorney granted by the deceased, John. KS was the daughter of John and sought to challenge the validity of certain transactions carried out by the donee, who was the son of John. The dispute centred on the settlement of John’s property and the role of the Tribunal in supervising enduring powers of attorney. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The legal issues for the court to decide were whether the donee had acted within the scope of his authority under the enduring power of attorney and whether there were any transactions that were invalid due to the donor's incapacity at the time of their execution. The court also needed to determine the extent of the Tribunal's supervisory role in such matters. The primary focus was on whether the donee had acted in a way that was beneficial to himself, and if this was consistent with the terms of the power of attorney.

The court found that while John was deceased, he was still capable at the time of his death. The donee had acted within the scope of his authority, but there were concerns about transactions that appeared to benefit him personally. The court held that the Tribunal had a supervisory role in ensuring that the donee acted in the best interests of the donor and that the donee had to file copies of records and accounts from the date of the settlement of the sale of John’s property. This was to provide transparency and accountability in the administration of the estate.

The final orders required the donee to file copies of records and accounts from the date of the settlement of the sale of John’s property, ensuring that the Tribunal could properly supervise the administration of the estate and any transactions carried out by the donee.