Perpetual Trustees Qld Ltd v Thompson
Case
•
[2011] QSC 48
•25 March 2011
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Perpetual Trustees Qld Ltd v Thompson [2011] QSC 48
[2011] QSC 48
25 March 2011
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited, acting as an administrator under the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000, sought to be paid remuneration for their services. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Queensland, which was asked to decide whether it had the jurisdiction to order that Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited should be paid remuneration for its functions as the administrator of a fund. The respondent, Thompson, argued that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction in this matter. The court was also asked to determine if the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to make an order for remuneration.
The court examined whether the original orders made by the Supreme Court contained any provision for the remuneration of the administrator. The court found that the original orders did not address the issue of remuneration. The court further considered whether the Supreme Court had the jurisdiction to order remuneration under its parens patriae jurisdiction. The court held that the applicant did not rely upon this jurisdiction, and therefore, the court was not empowered to order remuneration in this instance. The court also noted that Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited had previously been held not to be a trustee of the fund in question, and therefore, the Trusts Act 1973 did not apply. The court concluded that the original orders granted Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited the liberty to apply for remuneration, and since the order for remuneration did not vary the original order, the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to order that Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited was entitled to remuneration in respect of its functions as administrator of the fund.
The court found that the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal had the jurisdiction to make an order for remuneration and to fix the remuneration of the administrator pursuant to section 48 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000. The court noted that it had been held that an administrator appointed under the Act was entitled to remuneration only if an order was made. The court also noted that it had been held that section 48 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 did not apply to the remuneration of the Public Trustee or a trustee company when acting as an administrator of an adult under the Act. However, the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 was subsequently amended, and the Trustee Companies Act 1968 was repealed. The court held that the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to order that Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited was entitled to remuneration in respect of its functions as administrator of the fund to which it was appointed pursuant to an order of the Supreme Court.
I will hear the parties on the appropriate form of order and costs.
The court examined whether the original orders made by the Supreme Court contained any provision for the remuneration of the administrator. The court found that the original orders did not address the issue of remuneration. The court further considered whether the Supreme Court had the jurisdiction to order remuneration under its parens patriae jurisdiction. The court held that the applicant did not rely upon this jurisdiction, and therefore, the court was not empowered to order remuneration in this instance. The court also noted that Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited had previously been held not to be a trustee of the fund in question, and therefore, the Trusts Act 1973 did not apply. The court concluded that the original orders granted Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited the liberty to apply for remuneration, and since the order for remuneration did not vary the original order, the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to order that Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited was entitled to remuneration in respect of its functions as administrator of the fund.
The court found that the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal had the jurisdiction to make an order for remuneration and to fix the remuneration of the administrator pursuant to section 48 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000. The court noted that it had been held that an administrator appointed under the Act was entitled to remuneration only if an order was made. The court also noted that it had been held that section 48 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 did not apply to the remuneration of the Public Trustee or a trustee company when acting as an administrator of an adult under the Act. However, the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 was subsequently amended, and the Trustee Companies Act 1968 was repealed. The court held that the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to order that Perpetual Trustees Queensland Limited was entitled to remuneration in respect of its functions as administrator of the fund to which it was appointed pursuant to an order of the Supreme Court.
I will hear the parties on the appropriate form of order and costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Remuneration
-
Guardianship and Administration
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Courtney v Chalfen [2020] QCA 294
Cases Citing This Decision
12
Cases Cited
10
Statutory Material Cited
7
Nissen v Grunden
[1912] HCA 35
Callaghan v Zevering
[2010] QSC 323
Australian Hardboards Ltd v Hudson Investment Group Ltd
[2007] NSWCA 104