SC v Ability One Financial Management Pty Ltd

The case involved the State Trustee, acting under the Trustee Act 1925, applying to the Supreme Court for an order appointing a new manager of a protected estate. The estate in question was managed by Ability One Financial Management Pty Ltd, which opposed the application. The dispute centred on the welfare and interests of the protected person, who had dementia, and the State Trustee's contention that Ability One had obstructed the management of the estate.

The primary legal issue for the court was whether the welfare and interests of the protected person would be better served by appointing a new manager, as requested by the State Trustee. The court had to consider whether the applicant had discharged the onus of proving that the current manager was unsuitable and that a new manager would better serve the protected person's interests. Furthermore, the court needed to determine whether the actions of the applicant constituted an obstruction of the management of the estate by Ability One.

The court found that the State Trustee had not discharged the onus of proving that the current manager was unsuitable or that a new manager would better serve the protected person's interests. The court noted that the applicant had acted in a manner that could be considered an obstruction of the management of the estate by Ability One, which further supported the conclusion that the applicant had not discharged the onus. The court emphasised that the welfare and interests of the protected person were the paramount consideration in such matters and, given the circumstances, it was not in the protected person's best interests for the current manager to be replaced. Therefore, the application was dismissed.