SA

[2014] QCAT 635

CITATION: SA [2014] QCAT 635

PARTIES: SA

APPLICATION NUMBER: GAA10132-14

MATTER TYPE: Guardianship and administration matters for adults

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Senior Member Endicott

DELIVERED ON: 7 November 2014

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.    SN is appointed as guardian for SA for the following personal matters only:

(a)  accommodation decisions;

(b) health care of SA;

(c)  provision of services for SA.

2.    The Tribunal directs the guardian to provide a written account of their actions as guardian to the Tribunal no later than three (3) working days prior to the hearing.

3.    This guardianship appointment remains current for three (3) months or, if the Tribunal makes a further order in this matter, until the date of the further order, whichever is the sooner.

CATCHWORDS:

GUARDIANSHIP – where adult with confusion and poor memory – where adult had been placed into respite care – where the adult’s attorney was for financial matters only – where extension of respite and permanent care contracts had to be signed – where aged care facility required a guardian sign these contracts

INTERIM ORDER – where adult was at risk of having his care arrangements cancelled – where adult was at an immediate risk of harm – whether appointment of guardian on an interim basis could reduce the immediate risk of harm

Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 s 129

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. SA appointed his nephew, SN, to be his attorney for financial matters on 26 February 2009.  Until around August 2014 SA was able to make his own decisions but from that time he has manifested confusion and poor memory.  He was hospitalised in Adelaide where he had lived.  SN arranged to move SA to Brisbane when he was discharged from hospital.

2. Applications have been made to QCAT for the appointment of a guardian and administrator for SA.  One of the applicants, SN, applied for an interim order so that a guardian could be in place pending the hearing of the applications. 

3. QCAT can make an appointment of a decision maker on an interim basis for up to three months under section 129 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 without holding a hearing. If an interim order were to be made, the tribunal must be satisfied, on reasonable grounds, that there is an immediate risk of harm to the welfare or property of the adult concerned.

4. SN provided written submissions in support of his application for an interim order.  He stated that SA was residing in an aged care facility on a respite basis.  The period of respite had been due to expire on 14 November 2014 but had been extended to 4 December 2014.  SN stated that unless entry documents were signed and arrangements finalised about placement into permanent care by 4 December 2014, SA would be effectively homeless after that date. 

5. SN also stated that the aged care facility management were requiring that the respite extension contract had to be signed by 7 November 2014.  The tribunal was informed that the aged care facility did not accept that SN could sign the respite or permanent residential contracts as his authority as an attorney was considered inadequate for that purpose. The aged care facility were insisting that only a guardian could sign the contracts for SA.

6. It was submitted that SA was under an immediate risk of losing his current accommodation and care arrangements at the aged care facility unless the respite extension contract was signed by a guardian on his behalf by 7 November 2014.  It was submitted that there were no other viable alternatives for residential care as SA was incapable of caring for himself and needed care services.  SN submitted that SA was at an immediate risk of harm to his health and wellbeing.

7. I was satisfied that there was a reasonable basis to find that SA was at an immediate risk of harm if his accommodation and care arrangements could not be confirmed by 7 November 2014.  It was reasonable to reduce that risk by making an interim appointment of a guardian. 

8. As SN was already a decision maker for SA, it was appropriate that he should be considered for appointment as a guardian under an interim order.  He had already made some arrangements for the care of SA and he was fully acquainted with the current requirements of the aged care facility where SA was in respite care.  It was appropriate that SN should be appointed guardian on an interim basis until the hearing of the substantive applications pending before the tribunal.