PF [2017] WASAT 69

Jurisdiction:	STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL	Citation No:	[2017] WASAT 69
Published:	11/05/2017
Act:	GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 1990 (WA)
Case No:	GAA:4136/2016	Heard:	28 FEBRUARY 2017
Coram:	MS F CHILD (MEMBER)	Delivered:	24/03/17
No of pages:	15	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Administration order made, Public Trustee appointed Application for costs dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	PF
Catchwords:	Guardianship and administration Review of administration order Application for directions by administrators Ongoing conflict between appointed administrators Requirement for consent to appointment Requirement administrators act unanimously Suitability for appointment Application for costs under s 16(4) of Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA)
Legislation:	Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA), s 4, s 16(4), s 68(1), s 68(3), s 72(1), s 74, s 75, s 76, s 86, Sch 2 Pt B, Sch 2(h) State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 60(2), s 87(1)
Case References:	LC and JS [2007] WASAT 127
Summary	Following a review of an administration order which appointed three of the represented person's children as joint administrators of her estate, the Tribunal revoked the order and appointed the Public Trustee as administrator. The Tribunal found that the children were in conflict and had demonstrated an inability to communicate effectively and cooperate in the management of the estate. The Tribunal found that as a consequence, there had been delays in the management of the estate and that there were risks to the estate. Although two of the three administrators proposed that the appointment of the three children be confirmed with directions given to the administrators, the Tribunal found that this application illustrated the lack of unanimity between the administrators and even if the directions had been given, they would not provide a durable resolution to the conflict between them. In these circumstances it was in the best interests of the represented person that an independent administrator be appointed. The Tribunal authorised the Public Trustee as administrator to exercise the represented person's powers as trustee of the family trust.

JURISDICTION : STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ACT : GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 1990 (WA) CITATION : PF [2017] WASAT 69 MEMBER : MS F CHILD (MEMBER) HEARD : 28 FEBRUARY 2017 DELIVERED : 24 MARCH 2017 PUBLISHED : 11 MAY 2017 FILE NO/S : GAA 4136 of 2016 MATTER : PF

Represented Person

Catchwords:

Guardianship and administration Review of administration order Application for directions by administrators Ongoing conflict between appointed administrators Requirement for consent to appointment Requirement administrators act unanimously Suitability for appointment Application for costs under s 16(4) of Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA)

Legislation:

Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA), s 4, s 16(4), s 68(1), s 68(3), s 72(1), s 74, s 75, s 76, s 86, Sch 2 Pt B, Sch 2(h)

State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 60(2), s 87(1)

Result:

Administration order made, Public Trustee appointed

Application for costs dismissed

Summary of Tribunal's decision:

Following a…

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 PF

Details

AGLC: PF [2017] WASAT 69
Case: [2017] WASAT 69
Decision Date: 24 MARCH 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case, PF, the applicants sought directions from the court regarding the administration of the estate of a deceased individual. The applicants were the appointed administrators, who were also the deceased's children, but were in conflict with each other. The court was required to decide on several legal issues, including whether the consent of the applicants was necessary to appoint the Public Trustee as an additional administrator, whether the applicants were required to act unanimously, and whether the Public Trustee was suitable for the role. The court also had to consider an application for costs under section 16(4) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA). The court found that the consent of the applicants was not required to appoint the Public Trustee, and that the applicants were not required to act unanimously. The court also found that the Public Trustee was suitable for the role and dismissed the application for costs. The court made an administration order appointing the Public Trustee as an additional administrator of the estate.

Orders

Orders of the court

Administration order made, Public Trustee appointed

Application for costs dismissed

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.