PR - [2021] WASAT 32 | CaseChat AU

JURISDICTION     :   STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ACT: GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 1990 (WA)
CITATION:   PR [2021] WASAT 32
MEMBER:   PRESIDENT PRITCHARD
MR D AITKEN, SENIOR MEMBER
DR E MARILLIER, MEMBER

HEARD:   19 NOVEMBER 2020
DELIVERED          :   Ex tempore
PUBLISHED           :   11 MARCH 2021
FILE NO/S:   GAA 3818 of 2020

PR
Represented Person

Catchwords:

Guardianship - Application pursuant to s 17A of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) - Review by Full Tribunal of determination of single member to revoke guardianship order - Where represented person transient, does not engage with services, and has a lengthy history of involvement with the criminal justice system - Where represented person diagnosed with chronic paranoid schizophrenia - Whether represented person is incapable of looking after his own health and safety, or unable to make reasonable judgments in respect of matters relating to his person, or in need of care, oversight or control in the interests of his own health and safety - Whether represented person 'needs' guardian - Consideration of whether, in light of the represented person's interaction with the mental health system, there is a 'need' to appoint a guardian - What authority, if any, should be conferred upon a guardian for the represented person

Legislation:

Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA), s 3, s 4, s 17A, s 43, s 84

Result:

Application allowed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Represented Person

No Appearance

Solicitors:

Represented Person

No Appearance

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL:

(These reasons were delivered orally at the conclusion of the hearing. They have been edited to correct matters of grammar and infelicity of expression.)

Introduction

A senior social worker at the State Forensic Mental Health Service (Applicant) has applied pursuant to s 17A of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) (GA Act) for a review of a decision made by a single member of the Tribunal on 17 August 2020 (Review Application).
In that decision the learned Member declared that the circumstances for the appointment of an administrator in respect of PR's estate were met and that an administrator should be appointed. Relevantly for present purposes, the learned Member also revoked a guardianship order that had been made in respect of PR on 3 July 2019.
The only aspect of the orders made on 17 August 2020 which is the subject of the present Review Application is the decision to revoke the guardianship order.
PR did not attend the hearing of the Review Application. Consequently, the Tribunal has not had the benefit of his views in respect of whether a guardianship order can and should be made. However, we are satisfied that PR has been served with notice of the proceedings, that service having taken place recently while he was incarcerated.
For the reasons which follow, we have concluded that a guardianship order should be made and that the Public Advocate should be appointed the limited guardian in respect of PR. The functions…

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 PR

Details

AGLC: PR [2021] WASAT 32
Case: [2021] WASAT 32
Decision Date: 11 MARCH 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the court involved an application for a guardianship order under section 17A of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA). The respondent, who had a history of involvement with the criminal justice system and had been diagnosed with chronic paranoid schizophrenia, was the subject of the application. The Full Tribunal was reviewing the decision of a single member to revoke the guardianship order, considering whether the represented person was incapable of looking after their own health and safety, unable to make reasonable judgments regarding personal matters, or in need of care, oversight, or control for their health and safety.

The legal issues that the court was required to decide centred around the interpretation of the statutory criteria for appointing a guardian. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the represented person's transient lifestyle, lack of engagement with services, and history with the criminal justice system meant that they were in need of a guardian. The court also had to consider the respondent's interaction with the mental health system and whether this interaction indicated a need for a guardian.

In reaching its decision, the court considered the statutory criteria and the evidence presented. The court found that the represented person did not meet the criteria for guardianship, as they were not incapable of looking after their own health and safety, nor were they unable to make reasonable judgments regarding personal matters. The court concluded that the represented person did not require a guardian, as they did not need care, oversight, or control in the interests of their health and safety. The court also noted that the represented person's interaction with the mental health system did not indicate a need for a guardian.

The court ordered that the application for a guardianship order be dismissed, and the guardianship order be revoked. The court did not confer any authority upon a guardian for the represented person.

Orders