LER - [2017] QCAT 266

CITATION:	LER [2017] QCAT 266
PARTIES:	LER
APPLICATION NUMBER:	GAA2240-15
MATTER TYPE:	Guardianship and administration matters for adults
HEARING DATE:	On the papers
HEARD AT:	Brisbane
DECISION OF:	Senior Member Endicott
DELIVERED ON:	5 April 2017
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
ORDERS MADE:	The application by LS for a direction that The Public Trustee of Queensland reimburse her costs incurred in this application from the estate of LER is refused.
CATCHWORDS:	GUARDIANS, COMMITTEES, ADMINISTRATORS, RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS – APPOINTMENT – where an adult with impaired capacity has an administrator appointed for financial matters – where a review of that appointment sought – where review application resolved by a conference COSTS – where applicant for the review sought reimbursement of costs from the funds of the adult – where parties are required to bear their own costs in Tribunal proceedings – where applicant submitted that the review application was brought to protect the interests of the adult – where the applicant received a financial benefit from the resolved outcome of the application – whether any grounds on which reimbursement of costs could be made Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), s 11(1), s 47, s 127(2), s 138 and Schedule 1 General Principle 7(3)(b) Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 6(2)(a), s 7(2) and s 102(3) Public Trustee Act 1978 (Qld), s 80 Re ERF [2005] QGAAT 62
APPEARANCES:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act).

REPRESENTATIVES:

APPLICANT:

LS represented by Thomas Ashton from Robbins Watson, solicitors

OTHER ACTIVE PARTIES:

The Public Trustee of Queensland represented by Clinton Miles

NL and GL represented by Margaret Arthur of CRH Law

Public Guardian represented by Monique Montey

REASONS FOR DECISION

An application by LS to review the appointment of The Public Trustee of Queensland as the administrator for her husband, LER, was resolved at a conference conducted at the Tribunal on 3 May 2016. The applicant, LS, has applied for an order that The Public Trustee of Queensland be directed to pay her costs of the review application from the funds of LER that are being managed by the administrator. LS submits correctly that the QCAT Act requires that each party to a proceeding pay their own costs of that proceeding. Indeed, a similar provision is contained in s 127(1) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) (GAA Act). For that reason, she is not seeking a costs order against any of the active parties to her application but she is seeking reimbursement for the legal costs she had incurred from LER’s funds.
LS submits that her review application was brought to protect and promote the interests of LER. To support her request for reimbursement of her legal costs, LS’s submissions are based on whether the interests of justice require that an order as sought should be made. Her submissions ask the Tribunal to apply the factors set out in s 102(3) of…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading LER

Details

AGLC: LER [2017] QCAT 266
Case: [2017] QCAT 266
Decision Date: 5 April 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this matter, LS, the appointed administrator for the financial matters of LER, an adult with impaired capacity, sought to review the initial appointment of her role. This request was ultimately resolved through a conference, as detailed in the court's decision. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Public Trustee of Queensland should reimburse LS for the costs she incurred in pursuing the review, from the estate of LER.

The court considered the principles governing costs in such proceedings, recognising that typically, parties bear their own costs in Tribunal proceedings. LS argued that her review application was brought in the interests of protecting LER, and because she received a financial benefit from the resolved outcome, there were grounds for reimbursement. However, the court held that there were no grounds on which the reimbursement of costs could be justified, as the primary purpose of the review was not solely for the benefit of LER, but also for LS's own interests.

Upon evaluating the arguments and the nature of the review process, the court concluded that the application by LS for a direction that the Public Trustee reimburse her costs from the estate of LER should be refused. This decision underscores the importance of the intent behind such review applications and the financial implications for the estate.

Orders

Orders of the court

The application by LS for a direction that The Public Trustee of Queensland reimburse her costs incurred in this application from the estate of LER is refused.

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.