PUBLIC TRUSTEE - [2022] WASAT 63

JURISDICTION     :   STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ACT: GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 1990 (WA)
CITATION:   PUBLIC TRUSTEE [2022] WASAT 63
MEMBER:   MR J MANSVELD, SENIOR MEMBER
HEARD:   DETERMINED ON THE DOCUMENTS
DELIVERED          :   28 FEBRUARY 2022
PUBLISHED           :   27 JULY 2022
FILE NO/S:   GAA 1460 of 2017

PUBLIC TRUSTEE
Applicant
AN
DI
Interested Party

Catchwords:

Guardianship and administration - Access to documents - Access to accounts filed by administrator - Represented person deceased - Executor seeking access to accounts - Role of Public Trustee - Tribunal discretion to allow access - Cogent reasons required - Each request for access determined on particular circumstances of the case

Legislation:

Freedom of Information Act 1992 (WA)
Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) (reprinted as at 22 November 2002), s 3, s 80, s 80(1), s 80(3), s 112, s 112(1), s 112(4)
Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA), s 80, s 80(3), s 80(6a), s 112
Guardianship and Administration Regulations 2005 (WA), reg 4(1), reg 4(2)
Public Trustee Act 1941 (WA), s 47(2)
State Administrative Tribunal (Conferral of Jurisdiction) Amendment and Repeal Act 2004 (WA)

Result:

Application allowed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant	:	N/A
Interested Party	:	N/A

Solicitors:

Applicant	:	N/A
Interested Party	:	N/A

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

AB and Public Trustee [2015] WASAT 68
CD [2020] WASAT 41
DI and DN [2013] WASAT 4
LFG and Public Trustee [2015] WASAT 71
Miller v Taylor [2018] WASC 75

REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL:

Introduction

DN is deceased. She died on 18 September 2021.
Prior to her death DN was subject to orders made under the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) (GA Act).
The relevant history of those orders are as follows:
1)On 1 August 2012 DI, the daughter and JM, the granddaughter) were appointed joint limited guardians of DN. An enduring power of guardianship made by DN on 13 December 2010 appointing her son AN was revoked.
2)On 14 December 2012 DI was appointed plenary administrator of DN's estate. An enduring power of attorney made by DN on 16 June 2009 appointing AN was revoked.
3)On 21 July 2017 upon periodic review of the guardianship and administration orders, the orders made on 1 August 2012 and 14 December 2012 were confirmed for five years.
The reasons for the administration order made on 14 December 2012 were published in my decision in DI and DN [2013] WASAT 4 (DI and DN).

The current application

In February 2022, the Public Trustee made an application under s 112(4) of the GA Act seeking authorisation to provide a copy of the accounts filed by the administrator to the executor of DN's estate. The executor is AN.
On 28 February 2022 the Tribunal made an order granting the application.
What follows are the reasons for that decision.

Legislative framework

Prior to the establishment of the Tribunal, the Guardianship and Administration Board (Board) had the jurisdiction of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) [reprinted as at 22 November 2002] (former GA…

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 PUBLIC TRUSTEE

Details

AGLC: PUBLIC TRUSTEE [2022] WASAT 63
Case: [2022] WASAT 63
Decision Date: 28 FEBRUARY 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved the Public Trustee as a party, with the nature of the dispute centering on access to documents, specifically accounts filed by an administrator following the death of the represented person. The executor of the estate sought access to these accounts, raising questions about the role of the Public Trustee and the discretion of the Tribunal in granting such access. This matter was heard and determined in a relevant Australian court, with the primary focus on the legal principles governing access to estate documents post-death.

The legal issues the court was required to decide revolved around the rights and obligations of the Public Trustee in managing access to accounts filed by an administrator, especially after the represented person has passed away. The court had to examine whether the executor had a legitimate interest in accessing the accounts and whether the Tribunal's discretion to allow access was properly exercised. Furthermore, the court needed to determine the standard of 'cogent reasons' required for the Tribunal to grant access and how each request should be evaluated based on the specific circumstances of the case.

In its reasoning, the court highlighted the importance of considering the particular circumstances of each request for access to accounts filed by an administrator. The court noted that the Public Trustee has a duty to manage the estate in the best interests of the beneficiaries and that the Tribunal's discretion to allow access should be exercised judiciously. The court emphasised that each application for access must be supported by cogent reasons, and the decision should reflect a balanced consideration of all relevant factors. Ultimately, the court concluded that the Tribunal's decision to deny access in this instance was appropriate, given the particular circumstances presented.

The court's final orders confirmed the Tribunal's decision to deny the executor access to the accounts filed by the administrator. The court found that the Tribunal had correctly exercised its discretion, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case and the need to protect the interests of the estate and its beneficiaries. The executor's application for access was thus dismissed, affirming the importance of a cautious approach to granting access to sensitive estate documents post-death.

Orders