CITATION: WB v Protective Commissioner [2006] NSWADT 292 DIVISION: General Division PARTIES: APPLICANT
WB
RESPONDENT
Protective CommissionerFILE NUMBER: 063107 HEARING DATES: 21/06/2006 and 27/06/2006 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 09/21/2006
DATE OF DECISION:
10/05/2006BEFORE: Britton A - Judicial Member CATCHWORDS: Protected Estates Act - Protective Commissioner - powers as to property - Protective Commissioner - powers as to property MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter LEGISLATION CITED: Administrative Decisions Legislation Amendment Act 1997
Guardianship Act 1987
Protected Estates Act 1983CASES CITED: GG v Minister for Community Services [2002] NSWCA 247
KY, KX and KW v Protective Commissioner [2006] NSWADT 197
McDonald v Guardianship Administration Board [1993] 1 VR 521
Suzanne Frugtniet v Administrative Decisions Tribunal (Appeal Panel) & Anor; Brian Frugtniet v Administrative Decisions Tribunal (Appeal Panel) & Anor [2005] NSWCA 257REPRESENTATION: APPLICANT
RESPONDENT
In person
C Phang, legal officerORDERS: Pursuant to s 63(3)(d) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 the decision not to sell the property the subject of this application is remitted for reconsideration by the Protective Commissioner in accordance with the following recommendations:; i. That the Protective Commissioner conduct further research into the anticipated values of properties located in south west Sydney, over the next five years; ii. In the event that that evidence reveals that property values will probably decline or not increase in line with expected movements in inflation, then the decision to sell the property should be revisited having regard to the expected medium term return on cash investments; iii. That in the event the decision is made not to sell the property the subject of this review, that an annual review be conducted having regard to among other things, estimated short and medium term interest rates, rental returns and, trends within the Sydney property market
Section 126 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 applies to this decision.
Section 126 provides
(1A) This section applies only to the following:
(a) proceedings in the Community Services Division of the Tribunal,(b) appeals to an Appeal Panel from a decision made by the Tribunal in the Community Services Division,
(b1) proceedings in relation to an external appeal made under section 67A of the Guardianship Act 1987 or section 21A of the Protected Estates Act 1983,
(b2) proceedings in relation to a reviewable decision made under the Guardianship Act 1987 or the Protected Estates Act 1983
(c) such other proceedings (or class or classes of proceedings) as may be prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this section.
(1) A person must not, except with the consent of the Tribunal, publish or broadcast the name of any person:
(a) who appears as a witness before the Tribunal in any proceedings, or(b) to whom any proceedings before the Tribunal relate, or
(c) who is mentioned or otherwise involved in any proceedings before the Tribunal,
whether before or after the proceedings are disposed of.
Maximum penalty: 10 penalty units or imprisonment for 12 months, or both.
(2) This section does not prohibit the publication…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read WB v Protective Commissioner and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2006] NSWADT 292
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue for the AAT to determine was whether the decision made by the Protective Commissioner to not sell the property was unreasonable or unjustifiable. The applicant argued that the Protective Commissioner had failed to properly consider the potential medium term return on cash investments, and that the decision should be revisited in light of the anticipated values of properties in south west Sydney over the next five years.
The AAT found that the Protective Commissioner had not adequately considered the potential medium term return on cash investments, and that further research into the anticipated values of properties in south west Sydney over the next five years was necessary. The AAT also noted that the decision not to sell the property should be revisited if the evidence revealed that property values would probably decline or not increase in line with expected movements in inflation. In the event that the decision is made not to sell the property, the AAT recommended that an annual review be conducted, having regard to estimated short and medium term interest rates, rental returns, and trends within the Sydney property market.
The decision of the AAT was that the decision not to sell the property be remitted for reconsideration by the Protective Commissioner in accordance with the recommendations outlined above. The applicant was granted leave to appeal the decision of the AAT to the Federal Court of Australia.
Orders
Orders of the court
Pursuant to s 63(3)(d) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 the decision not to sell the property the subject of this application is remitted for reconsideration by the Protective Commissioner in accordance with the following recommendations:; i. That the Protective Commissioner conduct further research into the anticipated values of properties located in south west Sydney, over the next five years; ii. In the event that that evidence reveals that property values will probably decline or not increase in line with expected movements in inflation, then the decision to sell the property should be revisited having regard to the expected medium term return on cash investments; iii. That in the event the decision is made not to sell the property the subject of this review, that an annual review be conducted having regard to among other things, estimated short and medium term interest rates, rental returns and, trends within the Sydney property market
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.