Mao v AMP Superannuation Ltd

The case of *Mao v AMP Superannuation Ltd* concerned an appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales regarding the appointment of a tutor for a party deemed to be under a legal incapacity. The primary dispute revolved around the procedural requirements for commencing and continuing proceedings involving such a party, specifically in relation to the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).

The legal issues before the court included whether a determination by a court that a person is under a legal incapacity automatically stays proceedings involving that person, and the proper application of rules concerning the appointment of tutors, particularly the requirement for the proposed tutor to consent to their appointment and the regularity of orders appointing a tutor without naming a specific individual.

The Court of Appeal considered the interplay between the rules governing legal incapacity and the appointment of tutors. It reasoned that while a determination of legal incapacity has significant procedural implications, it does not automatically trigger a stay of all proceedings. The court also addressed the specific requirements of rule 7.18(5) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), which mandates the nomination of a tutor and evidence of their consent. The court found that certain orders made previously regarding the appointment of a tutor were irregular.

Ultimately, the Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal and allowed the appeal in part. It set aside specific prior orders and remitted the question of appointing a tutor for the applicant to the Equity Division for determination. The appeal was otherwise dismissed, with the respondents ordered to pay the applicant's costs.