PC
[2011] QCAT 473
•7 September 2011
| CITATION: | PC [2011] QCAT 473 |
| PARTIES: | Mr PC |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | GAA4536-11 / GAA4537-11 |
| MATTER TYPE: | Guardianship and administration matters for adults |
| HEARING DATE: | On the papers |
| HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
| DECISION OF: | Michelle Howard, Member |
| DELIVERED ON: | 7 September 2011 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
ORDERS MADE: | 1. The applications for review of the appointments of guardian and administrator for PC filed on 2 June 2011 are dismissed pursuant to s 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009. |
| CATCHWORDS: | DISMISSAL – application lacking in substance Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, s 47 Practice Direction No 8 of 2010 |
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009 (QCAT Act).
REASONS FOR DECISION
On 2 June 2011, PM filed an application in the tribunal seeking the review of the appointments of guardian and administrator for PC. Under orders currently in place, the Adult Guardian is guardian for PC for all personal matters until 13 October 2013 and The Public Trustee of Queensland is administrator for PC for all financial matters until further order of the tribunal.
The application is not entirely clear but seems to suggest that PM proposes herself as administrator and that PC can make his own personal decisions, but if it is determined that he requires a guardian, PM proposes herself.
Appointments of guardians and administrators are reviewed under section 31 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000. Section 31(2) provides that at the end of a review, the tribunal must revoke its order unless it is satisfied it would make an appointment if a new application was made.[1] Under section 31(4), the tribunal may make an order removing an appointee only if it is satisfied that the appointee is no longer competent or another person is more appropriate.
[1]A new appointment can be made essentially when an adult has impaired capacity for the matter; there is a need for a decision about it or the adult is likely to do something about it that involves unreasonable risk; and without an appointment the adult’s needs or interests will not be adequately met or protected: Guardianship and Administration Act 2000, s 12.
Under section 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, the tribunal may dismiss a matter which is, among other things, lacking in substance.
Paragraph 4 of QCAT Practice Direction 8 of 2010 provides that a review of a guardian and/or an administrator will be conducted at the end of the period of appointment except where new or relevant information has become available since the hearing; a relevant change of circumstances has occurred since the hearing; or relevant information that was not presented to the tribunal at the hearing has become available; and where the current appointee is no longer competent or another person is more appropriate for appointment. Paragraph 5 provides that when the tribunal considers the application does not disclose the information required in paragraph 4, it may hear and dismiss the application on the papers.
On 12 July 2011, the tribunal wrote to PM requesting that she provide information addressing the requirements of Paragraph 4 of the Practice Direction. She was reminded of this request in a telephone conversation with a registry employee on 28 July 2011 and an e-mail to her from the registry officer.
On 11 August, PM responded via email, stating in essence, that PC’s health had changed in that he had lost weight since she has not been allowed to take food to him and that therefore, he is not getting the correct food. I do not consider that PM’s application raises any relevant issues of the nature of those described in paragraph 4 of the Practice Direction which would support a review of the appointments other than at the end of the period of appointments.
In the circumstances, I consider that the applications for review are lacking in substance and should be dismissed.
I make orders accordingly.
0
0
0