RE TA; EX PARTE LA [2008] WASAT 90

Jurisdiction:	STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL	Citation No:	[2008] WASAT 90
Act:	GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 1990 (WA)
Case No:	GAA:2286/2007	Heard:	DETERMINED ON THE DOCUMENTS
Coram:	MS F CHILD (MEMBER) MS C HILL (SENIOR SESSIONAL MEMBER) DR D STEPNIAK (SENIOR SESSIONAL MEMBER)	Delivered:	1/05/08
No of pages:	13	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	LA TA LS
Catchwords:	Guardianship and administration Application for legal costs to be paid from represented person's estate under s 16(4) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) Whether the claimant for costs acted in the best interests of the represented person
Legislation:	Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA), s 16(4), s 76, s 80, s 107, s 118 State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 77, s 87
Case References:	GD and AD [2005] WASAT 203 IO Ex parte VK [2008] WASAT 8 LC and JS [2007] WASAT 127

JURISDICTION : STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL STREAM : HUMAN RIGHTS ACT : GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 1990 (WA) CITATION : RE TA; EX PARTE LA [2008] WASAT 90 MEMBER : MS F CHILD (MEMBER)

MS C HILL (SENIOR SESSIONAL MEMBER)

DR D STEPNIAK (SENIOR SESSIONAL MEMBER)

HEARD : DETERMINED ON THE DOCUMENTS DELIVERED : 1 MAY 2008 FILE NO/S : GAA 2286 of 2007 EX PARTE

Applicant

AND

Represented Person

Interested Party

Catchwords:

Guardianship and administration Application for legal costs to be paid from represented person's estate under s 16(4) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) Whether the claimant for costs acted in the best interests of the represented person

(Page 2)

Legislation:

Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA), s 16(4), s 76, s 80, s 107, s 118

State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 77, s 87

Result:

Application dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant : Self-represented

Represented Person : No appearance

Interested Party : Mr A Prime

Solicitors:

Applicant : Self-represented

Represented Person : No appearance

Interested Party : McCallum Donovan Sweeney

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

GD and AD [2005] WASAT 203
IO Ex parte VK [2008] WASAT 8
LC and JS [2007] WASAT 127

(Page 3)

REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL:

Summary of Tribunal's decision

1 Following a hearing at which the State Administrative Tribunal appointed an administrator of the estate of an elderly woman suffering dementia, the Tribunal received an application for the legal costs of a party to be paid from the woman's estate. The claim for costs was made by a daughter of the woman. The Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) provides that a party's legal costs relative to a proceeding brought under that Act, can be paid from the represented person's estate if the Tribunal is satisfied that the party acted in the best interests of the represented person.

2 Although the Tribunal found that the legal representation obtained by the parties had reduced the time required for the hearing through…

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 Re Ta; Ex Parte La

Details

AGLC: Re Ta; Ex Parte La [2008] WASAT 90
Case: [2008] WASAT 90
Decision Date: 1 MAY 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court was an application under section 16(4) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) by La, who was appointed as the legal representative for Ta. La sought the payment of legal costs from Ta's estate, arguing that the costs were incurred in the best interests of Ta. The dispute centred on whether the legal costs claimed by La were indeed in the best interests of the represented person, Ta, and thus should be paid from Ta's estate.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the costs claimed by La were incurred in the best interests of Ta, the represented person. The court had to consider the statutory provisions of section 16(4) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) and assess whether the costs were justified under the circumstances. The court needed to determine whether La acted appropriately and in accordance with the legislative requirements when incurring the legal costs.

The court dismissed the application, finding that the costs claimed by La were not incurred in the best interests of Ta. The court's reasoning was based on a detailed examination of the circumstances under which the costs were incurred and the actions taken by La. The court concluded that the legal costs did not align with what would be considered in the best interests of Ta, and therefore, the application for payment from Ta's estate was denied. The court's decision was grounded in a careful analysis of the statutory provisions and the specific context of Ta's case.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application 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.