TJC

The case involved an application by TJC, who suffered from an acquired brain injury from birth, to appoint a guardian to assist with decision-making. The parties in dispute were the applicant, TJC, and their mother, who had been their primary carer. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The court was required to decide whether a guardian was necessary for TJC and, if so, to determine the scope of the guardianship, including the authority to make decisions about contact with family members living in New South Wales.

The legal issues that the court had to address were whether TJC required a guardian for decision-making and, if so, who should be appointed and for what purpose. The court had to consider the evidence presented regarding TJC's ability to make decisions, the need for certainty in decision-making, and the implications of cross-border family contact. The court also had to consider the appropriate balance between TJC's autonomy and the need for protection.

The court found that TJC required a guardian for decision-making purposes, and it was in their best interests for their mother to be appointed as the guardian for personal decision-making, excluding decisions about contact with family members. The court appointed the Public Advocate to determine the contact with family members living in New South Wales, recognising the orders made in Western Australia. The court emphasised the importance of providing certainty in decision-making for TJC while respecting their autonomy as much as possible.

The final orders of the court were the appointment of TJC's mother as the guardian for personal decision-making, excluding decisions about contact with family members. The Public Advocate was appointed to determine the contact with family members living in New South Wales. The court also recognised the orders made in Western Australia regarding the contact with family members.