SBA
[2015] QCAT 28
•20 January 2015
| CITATION: | SBA [2015] QCAT 28 |
| PARTIES: | SBA |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | GAA331-15 |
| MATTER TYPE: | Guardianship and administration matters for adults |
| HEARING DATE: | On the papers |
| HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
| DECISION OF: | Acting Senior Member Endicott |
| DELIVERED ON: | 20 January 2015 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
| ORDERS MADE: | 1. SS is appointed guardian for SBA for the following personal matters only: (a) accommodation decisions; (b) health care of SBA; (c) provision of services for SBA. 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. 4. SS is appointed administrator for SBA for all financial matters. 5. The Tribunal directs the administrator to provide a written account of their actions as administrator to the Tribunal no later than three (3) working days prior to the hearing. 6. This administration 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. 7. That before 17 February 2015 the administrator must: (a) Search the records of the Registrar of Titles to identify any property registered in the adult’s name. (b) Give the registrar of titles a copy of this order and a notice to the registrar advising that any interest in property held by the adult is subject to this order. (c) Give to the Tribunal: (i) a copy of the “Lodgement Summary Form” from the Titles registry confirming the notice has been lodged for each property held by the adult; and (ii) a copy of the current title searches. 8 If the ownership of any property of the adult changes in any way or the adult acquires an interest in another property the administrator must, within fourteen (14) days of such changes: (a) give a copy of this order to the Registrar of Titles and (b) give a notice to the Registrar about the changes or the adult’s interest in another property. |
| CATCHWORDS: | GUARDIANSHIP – where adult assessed as having reduced cognitive functioning – where adult in hospital and had tried to self discharge – where adult had made claims of large amounts of cash in his vacant house INTERIM APPOINTMENT – where adult was at immediate risk of harm – where family member willing, able and available to make decisions – whether interim order should be made Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 s 129 |
APPEARANCES:
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
A social worker at a Brisbane hospital filed an application in the Tribunal seeking the appointment of a guardian and an administrator for SBA who was an inpatient at the hospital. According to evidence filed in the Tribunal, SBA had probable dementia. Testing had revealed that SBA had mild to severe cognitive impairment.
A geriatric registrar at the hospital, Dr Lin, reported that SBA lacked the capacity to make complex health care decisions due to a lack of insight and reasoning. Dr Lin also reported that SBA lacked capacity to make simple and complex lifestyle choices as he lacked insight into his neurodegenerative condition which severely affected SBA’s short term memory and mobility.
Dr Lin reported that SBA was unable to discuss the pros and cons of going into a residential care facility and that he refused to consider such an option. Dr Lin also reported that SBA lacked capacity to make simple and complex financial decisions, he could not estimate his assets or identify the amount and types of bills he had to pay. Dr Lin reported that SBA had been relying on a friend to pay his bills and that he had been wanting to delegate this task to his son. Dr Lin reported that SBA could not retain information about the need for him to remain in hospital for his own safety until a decision can be made about his discharge destination.
An assessment by Hans Receveur, clinical neuropsychology registrar, on 22 December 2014 revealed that SBA was functioning well below expectations across all domains of neuropsychological functioning. His learning and memory was assessed as very poor and Mr Receveur considered that SBA demonstrated symptoms consistent with both corticobasal degeneration and vascular dementia.
Appointments of guardians and administrators are made after hearings are conducted when the Tribunal can determine whether there is impaired decision making capacity and whether there is a need for an appointed decision maker. However appointments can be made on a limited basis prior to a hearing.
The applicant sought in this case an interim order. 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. Before an interim order can 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.
The applicant informed the Tribunal that SBA kept a large sum of money in his home and had been requesting friends to pay his accounts. The applicant stated that SBA had been telling people about the money in his house which SBA described as being between $30,000 and $400,000 at various times. According to the report by Dr Lin, SBA had tried to leave the hospital ward and self discharge from hospital and there may be a need to use chemical restraint if he tries to leave again.
SBA’s son lives overseas but he made arrangements to travel to Brisbane to see his father. SBA’s son had informed the Tribunal that he was willing to be appointed as a decision maker for his father.
I was satisfied that there was an immediate risk of harm to SBA. His house was vacant while he was in hospital and according to the evidence provided to the Tribunal, a considerable amount of amount was left in the house by SBA. He was unable to take direct measures to protect his financial affairs and he relied on friends to assist him. This situation was unsatisfactory for both SBA and his friends and required in my view urgent action to secure his financial resources and to pay any outstanding liabilities by a person who could be held accountable to the Tribunal.
I was also satisfied that SBA was at an immediate risk of harm until a discharge decision could be made by a person with clear lawful authority. SBA had tried to abscond from hospital and he was at risk of having to be chemically restrained for behavioural reasons. Without a guardian, there was no one suggested in the evidence who would be asked to give their consent to the use of medication for the purpose of restraining SBA rather than treating him for a medical condition. There was a clear basis disclosed to provide immediate means of decision making support for accommodation, services and health care for SBA so that his needs were met in an appropriate manner.
Although the applicant had not sought appointment of SBA’s son to decision making roles, I was satisfied that SS was close to his father and willing to take on a decision making role. Family members are usually more appropriate for appointment than statutory appointees when family are willing, able and available for the role. The evidence provided to the Tribunal with the application, particularly in the neuropsychological report, revealed that SS had a close and supportive relationship with his father. I was satisfied by the evidence that SS would be appropriate for appointment under an interim order.
0
0
0