MRH

[2015] WASAT 17

MRH [2015] WASAT 17

Jurisdiction:	STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL	Citation No:	[2015] WASAT 17
Published:	23/02/2015
Act:	GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 1990 (WA)
Case No:	GAA:3321/2014	Heard:	14 NOVEMBER AND 8 DECEMBER 2014
Coram:	MS F CHILD (MEMBER)	Delivered:	8/12/14
No of pages:	14	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Applications dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	MRH
Catchwords:	Guardianship and administration ­ Applications for appointment of a guardian and administrator ­ Applications for intervention in an enduring power of attorney and enduring power of guardianship ­ Donor diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease ­ Cognitive impairment ­ Presumption of capacity to make treatment decisions not displaced ­ No need for appointment of an administrator as enduring power of attorney operating ­ Applicants had proper interest to bring applications to intervene in enduring power of attorney but no evidence that an enquiry regarding operation of the enduring power of attorney required ­ Wishes of donor that her financial information not be shared
Legislation:	Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA), s 4, s 107, s 109, s 110F, s 110N State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 39
Case References:	EW [2010] WASAT 91 KS [2008] WASAT 29 S v State Administrative Tribunal (WA) (No 2) [2012] WASC 306
Summary	The Tribunal dismissed applications made by two daughters seeking orders for the appointment of a guardian and an administrator for their mother who had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and for intervention in an enduring power of attorney (EPA) and an enduring power of guardianship (EPG) she had executed appointing another daughter as both an attorney and as joint enduring guardians with another person. ,The medical evidence confirmed the diagnosis but the Tribunal was not persuaded that the presumption that the donor had lost capacity to make personal decisions for herself had been displaced.  Further, the Tribunal determined that there was no need for the orders sought, as the donor had executed an EPA, by which her financial affairs were managed, and an EPG and an Advanced Health Directive for future personal decision-making. ,In respect of the applications for intervention in the EPA and the EPG, although the Tribunal found that the applicants, as daughters who had maintained contact with the donor, had a proper interest in the matter, in the exercise of discretion, the Tribunal declined to intervene in the EPA and the EPG.  The Tribunal accepted that both instruments reflected the wishes of the donor.  The Tribunal found that the applicants had not provided any evidence to support the need for an enquiry into the operation of the EPA.  The Public Advocate had conducted an investigation of the application and reported that no other family member challenged the conduct of the attorney.  In respect of the EPG, the Tribunal found that the capacity of the donor to make personal decisions had not been rebutted. ,The Tribunal declined to vary the EPA to require the attorney to provide financial information to the applicants as this was against the express wishes of the donor.…