CB [2013] QCAT 421
CITATION: CB [2013] QCAT 421
PARTIES: CB
APPLICATION NUMBER: GAA3472-13
MATTER TYPE: Guardianship and administration matters for
adults
HEARING DATE: On the papers
HEARD AT: Brisbane
DECISION OF: C Endicott, Senior Member
DELIVERED ON: 29 May 2013
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
ORDERS MADE: 1. The application for an interim order is
dismissed
CATCHWORDS: GUARDIANSHIP – where attorneys in dispute –
where evidence did not disclose an immediate
risk of harm
Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 s
129
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to section 32 of
the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] CB is 85 years of age. She appointed three attorneys to make decisions
about personal, health and financial matters on 15 October 1999. One of
the attorneys has pre-deceased CB and the other two attorneys continue
in that role.
[2] A dispute has arisen between the attorneys as to decisions about CB’s
property. In particular one attorney wants the house owned by CB to be
immediately sold but the other attorney has taken steps to have the house
tenanted out. Allegations of mis-management have been raised. There is
also some dispute over care issues for CB.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
[3] One of the attorneys, CE, applied to QCAT seeking the appointment of a
guardian and administrator for CB. In addition CE sought interim orders
with a view to having decisions made about health and care issues and to
having a decision made about the sale of the house before a new tenancy
agreement was entered into. The application for the appointment for the
appointment of a guardian and an administrator was opposed by the other
attorney, OA, and by another member of CB’s family. They also opposed
the making of the interim orders sought by CE.
[4] QCAT has the power to appoint decision makers for adults with impaired
decision making capacity. Appointments of decision makers are made
after a hearing of the application and when the presumption of capacity
has been rebutted. However 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 a hearing.
[5] Section 129 of that Act permits the tribunal to make an interim
appointment if the tribunal is satisfied, on reasonable grounds, that there
is an immediate risk of harm to the welfare or property of the adult
concerned.
[6] The information provided to QCAT has established that there are some
disputes between the attorneys. However it is clear that the major dispute
arises from a difference of opinion as to how best to manage the financial
affairs of CB. CE contends that CB is at risk of financial loss due to the
actions of OA but that contention is denied by the other attorney. Both
attorneys have provided information supporting the basis on which they
have arrived at their respective opinions.
[7] The evidence provided to the tribunal did not satisfy me that there is an
immediate risk of harm to the welfare and property or assets of CB. She
is in care and being provided with services. Her property and assets are
being managed and if any losses have arisen due to a breach of the
obligations of the attorneys, steps are available to make good any such
loss. It was not submitted that CB was at risk of losing her assets in the
immediate future. A hearing of the application is likely to be arranged
within the next three months when the issues of the need for an
appointment and who should be appointed can be considered and
determined by the tribunal.
[8] Orders made under section 129 are discretionary in nature. An interim
appointment should only be made when a relevant risk of harm is
established on the evidence. An interim appointment should not be made
merely because it would be more convenient than waiting for a hearing in
the normal course of events.
[9] The application for interim orders under section 129 of the Guardianship
and Administration Act 2000 is dismissed.
-- 2 of 2 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCAT/2013/421