DLJ [2026] QCAT 376

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CITATION: DLJ [2026] QCAT 376 PARTIES: In an application about matters concerning DLJ In applications about matters concerning DLJ APPLICATION NO/S: GAA8090-26; GAA8091-26; GAA8166-26; GAA9813-26 MATTER TYPE: Guardianship and administration matters for adults DELIVERED ON: 20 August 2026 HEARING DATE: 20 August 2026 HEARD AT: Brisbane DECISION OF: Senior Member Browne ORDERS: DISMISSAL The application for declaration about capacity and for the appointment of a guardian transferred to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal by Order of the Supreme Court of Queensland (the Court) dated 23 December 2025 (GAA8091-26 and GAA8090-26) is dismissed under s 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld). LIMITATION ORDERS Under s 109 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), the following documents and information are confidential and must be withheld from all persons other than in the way and only to the persons as stated in Order 6 that is necessary for the Tribunal to comply with a request for access to a document for the purposes of s 103 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld): (a) information and material concerning DLJ remitted to the Tribunal by Order of the Court made 23 December 2025 and further Order of the Court made 18 May 2026 including the originating application filed 22 December 2025, the application filed 30 April 2026, statements, affidavits, exhibits, written submissions, documents tendered to the Court in the proceedings of 23 December 2025 and further proceedings of 18 May 2026, parties’ correspondence with the Court -- 1 of 21 -- 2 from the application of 23 December 2025 and from the application of 18 May 2026. (b) the transcript of the hearing before The Honourable Justice Hindman of the Supreme Court of Queensland on 23 December 2025. (c) the transcript of the hearing before The Honourable Justice Treston of the Supreme Court of Queensland on 18 May 2026. (d) all information and material given to the Tribunal on 8 June 2026, in compliance with the Tribunal’s Order dated 26 May 2026 under s 130 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), including the Tribunal’s Order dated 26 May 2026 and 11 June 2026, the covering letter and attachments (21 pages). (e) all information and material including written submissions and documents filed in the Tribunal by DLJ, DQT and any other person including any representative. (f) Tribunal’s Directions dated 26 May 2026, 10 June 2026 and 15 July 2026 (g) Tribunal’s Decisions dated 26 May 2026 and 11 June 2026. (h) Tribunal’s Order and Reasons made 20 August 2026 that identify DLJ or any family member of DLJ or any health professional. The documents and information referred to in Order 2 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g) and (h) above be placed in a sealed envelope(s) which may only be opened by further Order of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal or by a Judge of the Supreme Court, with the sealed envelope to be so marked. Subject to further order of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal or by a Judge of the Supreme Court, the Tribunal’s file must not be made available for search by any person. Under s 108 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) publication of the following is prohibited and must not be published in any way: -- 2 of 21 -- 3 (a) information about the Supreme Court proceeding by Order of the Court made 23 December 2025 and further Order of the Court made 18 May 2026. (b) information about the Tribunal’s proceedings. (c) information about the documents given to the Tribunal in compliance with s 130 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) referred to in Order 2(d) above. (d) information about the documents filed by DQT and DLJ other than the enduring power of attorneys for DLJ. (e) the identity of DLJ including her full name, those of her family members and their ages and occupations, the identity of any health professionals, any hospital and health service, and any medical practices where DLJ may have obtained treatment and any other fact or matter that may identify DLJ. ACCESSIBLE DOCUMENTS Orders 2, 3 and 4 above to not apply to the documents listed below, for the purposes of s 103(2) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) that the Tribunal considered credible, relevant and significant to an issue in the proceedings (GAA8091-26 and GAA8090-26) and subject to relevant information in the document being anonymised and redacted before access is given to the extent necessary to ensure - (a) the document does not disclose information necessary to comply with the Tribunal’s Order 5 above, and (b) access is given only upon request by each active party, or any person the Tribunal considers has a sufficient interest in the proceedings within a reasonable time, as provided under s 103(2) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 200 (Qld) to the following documents only: (i) Order of the Supreme Court dated 23 December 2025 (anonymised). (ii) Order of the Supreme Court dated 18 May 2026 (anonymised). (iii) Tribunal Directions dated 26 May 2026. -- 3 of 21 -- 4 (iv) Tribunal Decision dated 26 May 2026. (v) Tribunal Decision and Directions dated 26 May 2026. (vi) Tribunal Directions dated 10 June 2026. (vii) Tribunal’s Directions dated 15 July 2026. (viii) the enduring power of attorney dated 10 January 2026 executed in the State of Queensland and enduring power of attorney dated 29 January 2026 executed in the State of New South Wales. (ix) email and attachments dated 18 June 2026 filed by DQT. (x) email and attachments dated 25 June 2026 filed by DLJ. (xi) email and attachments dated 20 July 2026 filed by DQT. (xii) email and attachments dated 21 July 2026 filed by DQT. (xiii) written submissions and attachments dated 25 June 2026 filed by DLJ on 21 July 2026. (xiv) written submission dated 29 July 2026 filed by Clayton Utz Solicitors. Other than to DLJ and to the Supreme Court (to be opened only by a Judge of the Supreme Court) only anonymised Reasons for the Tribunal’s Decision and Order dated 20 August 2026 (with cover sheets excluding relevant names and relevant information as necessary) shall be given by the Tribunal to any active party or any person who is entitled to a copy of the Tribunal’s Order and Reasons. Reasons for the Tribunal’s Decision and Order dated 20 August 2026 shall be given to the Supreme Court (to be placed in a sealed envelope which may only be opened by a Judge of the Supreme Court, with the sealed envelope to be so marked). INFORMATION TO BE GIVEN TO THE PUBLIC ADVOCATE For the purposes of satisfying the requirement under s 122(5) of the Guardianship and -- 4 of 21 -- 5 Administration Act 2000 (Qld) only the following be given to the Public Advocate within 45 days: (a) the Orders of the Supreme Court dated 23 December 2025 and 18 May 2026 (anonymised). (b) anonymised Reasons for the Tribunal’s Decision and Order dated 20 August 2026 (with cover sheets excluding relevant names and relevant information as necessary to the extent that it may identify any information about the Supreme Court proceedings and the Tribunal’s proceedings and the identity of DLJ). CATCHWORDS: HEALTH LAW – GUARDIANSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF PROPERTY OF PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED CAPACITY – JURISDICTION, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE – where Supreme Court of Queensland remitted to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal the question of capacity and for applications for the appointment of a guardian – where information and documents were given to the Tribunal – where Supreme Court made orders to suppress the identity of the person concerned and for non-publication of documents – where enduring power of attorney for the person was filed in the Tribunal after the Supreme Court proceedings – where no health professional is now asserting a lack of capacity – where Tribunal made pre-hearing non- publication and pre-hearing confidentiality orders – where Tribunal appointed a representative under s 125 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) – where Tribunal initiated applications to dismiss the applications under s 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) to be determined on the papers – where Tribunal initiated applications for a confidentiality order and non-publication order to be determined on the papers – whether the Tribunal should exercise the power to dismiss the proceedings under s 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) – whether the Tribunal should make limitation orders under Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld). Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Qld), s 14A Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), s 2, s 5, s 6, s 7, s 10, s 11, s 11A, s 11B, s 81, s 82, s 100, s 103, s 108, s 109, s110, s 111, s 112, s 113, s 114A, s 118, s 119, s 125, s 130, s 241, s 250 Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld), s 48, 58 -- 5 of 21 -- 6 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 3, s 28, s 29, s 47, s 95, s 101 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 (Qld), r 21 Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v SLS [2021] QSC 111 Aziz v Prestige Property Service P/L and Anor [2007] QSC 265 Barr v Amalgamated Property Maintenance Pty Ltd [2020] QSC 170 Bergmann v DAW [2010] QCA 143 Dey v Victorian Railway Commissioners (1949) 78 CLR 62. General Steel Industries Inc. v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125 M & J Gray Investments Pty Ltd v AMP Pacific Fair Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] QCAT 454. NJ [2022] QCAT 283 APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION The matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) REASONS FOR DECISION [1] On 15 July 2026, I made directions about the future conduct of proceedings (GAA8090-26 and GAA8091-26) concerning DLJ and invited the relevant parties to file in the Tribunal any written submissions in relation to: (a) whether the Tribunal should dismiss the proceedings (GAA8090-26 and GAA8091-26) under s 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (‘QCAT Act’); and (b) making a confidentiality order and non-publication order (GAA8166-26 and GAA9813-26) under the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld). [2] The relevant parties have filed written submissions and supporting documents in compliance with the Tribunal’s Directions and have been given notice of the proceeding to be determined on the papers.1 [3] There are now two issues to be determined by me, as set out in the Tribunal’s Directions dated 15 July 2026 and considered below. [4] First, whether the Tribunal should exercise the power under s 47 of the QCAT Act to dismiss the applications remitted to QCAT for a determination of legal capacity of DLJ and appointment of any guardian, in circumstances where: 1 See s 118 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) that requires the Tribunal to give notice of the hearing to the adult and relevant persons. -- 6 of 21 -- 7 (a) the Tribunal has received an enduring power of attorney for DLJ dated 10 January 2026 executed in the State of Queensland; and (b) no health professional or other person is currently asserting a lack of capacity as defined under the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) on behalf of DLJ. [5] Secondly, whether the Tribunal should make a confidentiality order and non- publication order referred to as ‘limitation orders’ under the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) to protect the identity of DLJ and relevant persons, and material and documents filed in relation to the Supreme Court of Queensland proceeding that are the subject of a confidentiality order and suppression order. [6] It is convenient to set out below some background information about this matter and the Tribunal’s power to determine a person’s capacity for a matter and to appoint a guardian. Background [7] The applications were remitted to QCAT by Order of the Supreme Court of Queensland (the Court) dated 23 December 2025 for determination of the legal capacity of DLJ and appointment of such guardians (if any) that the Tribunal may consider necessary to be appointed. 2 [8] The Supreme Court proceedings related to matters concerning DLJ and final orders were made by the Court exercising its parens patriae jurisdiction. Importantly, the Court made orders on 23 December 2025 to supress the identity of DLJ, those of her family and any treating health professionals and, amongst other things, for documents and information before the Court and the transcript of the Court proceeding be placed in sealed envelopes and only opened by further order of the Court or QCAT (with the sealed envelopes so marked). The Court also ordered that only anonymised Reasons for Judgment and Orders shall be released by the Court and to non-parties.3 [9] QCAT did not receive the applications and relevant documents from the Court until on or about 25 May 2026 after a further Supreme Court proceeding concerning DLJ and Order of the Court made 18 May 2026. Relevantly, on 18 May 2026, the Court made orders to supress the identity of DLJ, those of her family and relevant treating health professionals and that only anonymised Reasons for Judgment and Orders shall be released by the Court and to non-parties.4 [10] After the Tribunal received the referral of documents from the Court, I initiated applications for a pre-hearing confidentiality order and pre-hearing non-publication order and made decisions and directions on the papers using the power under the QCAT Act, Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 (Qld) (‘QCAT Rules’) and the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) (‘GA Act’).5 [11] It is convenient to set out below the pre-hearing procedural steps taken by the Tribunal that I considered necessary to prevent the disclosure of documents and other information that are the subject of a suppression and non-disclosure order made by 2 Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) (GA Act), s 241. 3 Order of the Court made 23 December 2025 and 18 May 2026. 4 Court Order made 18 May 2026. 5 Tribunal’s Directions dated 26 May 2026. See s 62 of the QCAT Act. -- 7 of 21 -- 8 Order of the Court.6 Further, the pre-hearing procedural steps taken by me, set out below, were considered necessary in the circumstances to ensure, as far as is practicable, the Tribunal has all relevant information and material to hear and decide the matter and to seek and take account of the views, wishes and preferences expressed or demonstrated by DLJ. [12] On 26 May 2026, the Tribunal took the following pre-hearing steps: (a) appointed a representative from Aged and Disability Advocacy Law (ADA Law) for DLJ, subject to her consent being given, under s 125 of the GA Act. (b) directed that arrangements be made as a matter of priority, for relevant information including obtaining a health professional report about DLJ’s capacity, be filed in the Tribunal.7 (c) dispensed with the requirement to give a copy of the documents and information, the subject of the referral by Order of the Court, to DLJ and relevant persons and directed that any appointed representative for DLJ file in the Tribunal a written submission addressing whether a copy of the relevant referral should be given to DLJ and whether notice should be given to any other person including members of DLJ’s family.8 (d) directed that, unless otherwise ordered, the Tribunal will determine whether to give a copy of the referral to DLJ and notice of the referral to relevant persons on the papers. (e) directed that a copy of the Tribunal’s Directions and notice of the referral in a de-identified format be given to the legal representative (Clayton Utz Solicitors) for Hospital X who was a party to the Supreme Court proceeding.9 (f) made an order under s 130 of the GA Act for documents or information including a transcript of the Supreme Court proceedings be given to the Tribunal that may be relevant to the applications remitted to QCAT by the Court. (g) made a pre-hearing confidentiality order and pre-hearing non-publication order under the GA Act to prevent the disclosure of documents and other information that are the subject of a suppression and non-disclosure order by Order of the Court including the transcript of the Supreme Court proceedings of 23 December 2025 and 18 May 2026.10 (h) made a pre-hearing confidentiality order in relation to the documents and information provided to the Tribunal under s 130 of the GA Act.11 [13] On 7 July 2026, the Tribunal was informed in writing that DLJ did not consent to the appointment of a proposed representative from ADA Law and that she had her own representation.12 6 Order of the Court made 23 December 2025 and 18 May 2026. 7 See s 114(1)(a) of the GA Act. See GA Act sch 4 (definition of ‘capacity’). 8 QCAT Rules, r 21. 9 QCAT Rules, r 21. 10 GA Act s 108, s 109, s 110. 11 GA Act s 108, s 109, s 110. See Tribunal Decision and Directions dated 26 May 2026. 12 Email filed by ADA Law dated 7 July 2026 and see written submissions filed by DQT by email dated 18 June 2026. -- 8 of 21 -- 9 [14] Written submissions and documents were soon after filed in the Tribunal by DLJ and her husband, DQT. The written submissions make clear that DLJ only became aware of these proceedings after a representative from ADA Law attempted to contact her.13 [15] DLJ raises a number of concerns about whether the Tribunal had proceeded to make orders in her absence and without giving her notice of the hearing, a copy of the Tribunal orders and reasons and other material.14 DLJ also requests that the Tribunal provide reasons for any decision and states that, amongst other things, she does not consent to her husband, DQT, being excluded from the proceedings and her enduring power of attorney being ignored. An extract of some of the concerns outlined in the written submissions dated 25 June 2026 is set out below: … I do not consent to DQT being excluded I do not consent to my EPOA being ignored I do not consent to ADA Law or any representative being appointed or used in relation to me without my informed consent, my own legal team, and proper disclosure … This is a human rights issue. This is a procedural fairness issue. This is a natural justice issue.15 [16] The concerns expressed by DLJ in her written submissions are understandable because, as explained above, the Tribunal did not immediately notify her about the applications remitted to the Tribunal by Order of the Court. Further, as discussed above, I made pre-hearing decisions and directions to preserve the effectiveness of the Court’s Order and to ensure that all relevant information and material was before the Tribunal to hear and decide the matter.16 It is important to say that the Tribunal did not make any findings or final orders in relation to DLJ’s capacity and the application for the appointment of a guardian. [17] As discussed below, the pre-hearing confidentiality order and pre-hearing non- publication order made by the Tribunal is vacated at the start of the hearing.17 In the present matter, the Tribunal is required to consider whether it is necessary to make a confidentiality order and non-publication order. What is the Tribunal’s power to appoint a guardian and to a determine a person’s capacity – overview of the guardianship jurisdiction [18] The Supreme Court of Queensland may, if it considers it appropriate, transfer a proceeding within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to the Tribunal.18 Importantly, the GA 13 Written submissions filed by email dated 25 June 2026. 14 Written submissions filed by email on 18 June 2026 and on 25 June 2026. 15 Written submissions filed by email on 18 June 2026 and on 25 June 2026. 16 GA Act s 130. 17 GA Act s 110. 18 GA Act s 241. -- 9 of 21 -- 10 Act does not affect the Court’s inherent jurisdiction, including its parens patriae jurisdiction.19 The Tribunal’s exclusive jurisdiction for the appointment of guardians and administrators [19] The Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction for the appointment of guardians and administrators for adults with impaired capacity for matters.20 The person to whom the proceeding relates is referred to as the adult under the GA Act and are the primary focus of the Act.21 The GA Act has been described as protective legislation providing a legal mechanism to safeguard the rights and property of people who may have impaired decision-making capacity.22 [20] The Tribunal has the functions given to it by the GA Act, for example, making declarations about the capacity of an adult, considering applications for the appointment of guardians and administrators and making declarations, orders or recommendations, or giving directions or advice, in relation to guardians and administrators, attorneys, enduring documents and related matters.23 [21] The GA Act also refers to an ‘active party’ for a proceeding in relation to the adult under s 119. An active party must be given a reasonable opportunity to present the active party’s case and is entitled to access of relevant documents before, during and after a hearing as provided under s 103. The Tribunal may displace the right to access a document or other information only by a confidentiality order. The right to access a document or other information is not affected by an adult evidence order, a closure order or a non-publication order.24 The presumption of capacity [22] The GA Act mandates that the Tribunal or the Court is to presume the adult has capacity for the matter until the contrary is proven.25 [23] Capacity, for a person for a matter, means the person is capable of- (a) Understanding the nature and effect of decisions about the matter; and (b) Freely and voluntarily making decisions about the matter; and (c) Communicating the decisions in some way.26 [24] It is necessary to consider all of the elements of the definition of ‘capacity’ to understand the extent of the person’s impaired decision-making.27 19 GA Act s 240. See Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v SLS [2021] QSC 111 at [118], where the Supreme Court considered in referring a civil matter to QCAT’s guardianship jurisdiction that the parens patriae is to be exercised cautiously. 20 GA Act s 82. 21 GA Act s 11A. 22 Bergmann v DAW [2010] QCA 143 [42]. 23 GA Act s 81. 24 GA Act s 103(6). 25 GA Act s 11, s 5, s 6 and 11B. 26 GA Act Schedule 4. See GA Act s 10 ‘types of matters’ and GA Act s 2 (definition of ‘a matter’). 27 Aziz v Prestige Property Service P/L and Anor [2007] QSC 265 [65]. -- 10 of 21 -- 11 [25] A person is presumed to have capacity for a matter when making a declaration about a person’s capacity under s 146 of the GA Act.28 The presumption of capacity for matters is also reflected in the general principles under s 11B that must be applied by a person and the Tribunal in performing a function or exercising a power under the GA Act. Relevantly, in exercising the powers under the GA Act the Tribunal is required to observe and uphold a person’s relevant rights and interests reflected in the general principles (s 11B) and this includes, amongst other things, to respect and uphold the person’s human rights and fundamental freedoms. [26] A person’s capacity is to be determined at the present time having regard to a particular matter.29 There are published guidelines to assist persons required to make assessments about the capacity of adults.30 [27] A finding of impaired capacity for the matter is a necessary finding in exercising the power under s 12 of the GA Act to appoint a guardian for a personal matter, or an administrator for a financial matter.31 In exercising the power under s 12 of the GA Act to appoint a guardian, the Tribunal is required to make a decision which is compatible with the adult’s relevant human rights as provided under the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) that may be affected by the decision and that any limits to the identified human rights are reasonable and justifiable.32 Acknowledgement of rights and to take account of the adult’s views [28] The GA Act contains acknowledgements such as an adult’s right to make decisions is fundamental to the adult’s inherent dignity, the right to make decisions includes the right to make decisions with which others may not agree, the right of an adult with impaired capacity to make decisions should be restricted and interfered with, to the least possible extent; and an adult with impaired capacity has a right to adequate and appropriate support for decision-making.33 [29] The GA Act also seeks to strike a balance between the right of an adult with impaired capacity to the greatest possible degree of autonomy in decision-making; and the adult’s right to adequate and appropriate support for decision-making.34 [30] In performing its functions or exercising its powers under the GA Act in relation to an adult, the Tribunal must, to the greatest extent practicable, seek and take account of the views, wishes and preferences expressed or demonstrated by the adult and the views of any member of the adult’s support network.35 [31] The Tribunal may appoint a representative under s 125 of the GA Act to represent the adult’s views, wishes and interests. Giving of notice of the application and hearing [32] The GA Act and the QCAT Rules contain relevant provisions for the giving of notice of the applications or referrals and the hearing to the adult and relevant persons. The 28 See GA Act sch 4 (definition of ‘capacity’). 29 Barr v Amalgamated Property Maintenance Pty Ltd [2020] QSC 170 [46]. 30 GA Act s 250. See the Queensland Capacity Assessment Guidelines 2020, as published. 31 See GA Act sch 2 (definition of ‘personal matter’). See GA Act sch 4 (definition of ‘capacity’). 32 NJ [2022] QCAT 283. 33 GA Act s 5. 34 GA Act s 6. 35 GA Act s 81(2). -- 11 of 21 -- 12 Rules also provide that relevant information be included with an application to the Tribunal. [33] Relevantly, rule 21(3) of the QCAT Rules require the Tribunal to give a copy of the application or referral to the relevant person referred to as the adult unless subrule (4) applies including the Tribunal considers notifying the adult of the proceeding might be prejudicial to the physical or mental health or wellbeing of the adult. The Tribunal is also required to give notice of the application or referral, unless the Tribunal orders otherwise, to relevant persons as provided under rule 21(3). [34] Section 118 of the GA Act requires the Tribunal to give at least 7 days notice of a hearing of an application about a matter to the adult and relevant persons as provided under s 118. However, the Tribunal is not required to give notice to the adult in certain circumstances as provided under s 118(3) of the GA Act, such as, and amongst other things, the Tribunal considers that notice to the adult might be prejudicial to the physical or mental health or wellbeing of the adult. Obtaining information and material and access to documents [35] Section 130 of the GA Act provides that to hear and decide a matter in a proceeding, the Tribunal must ensure, as far as it considers it practicable, it has all the relevant information and material. At the Tribunal’s request, a person who has custody or control of information or material that the Tribunal considers is necessary to make an informed decision about the matter must give the information or material to the Tribunal, unless the person has a reasonable excuse. The Tribunal may order a person give it information or material and as provided under s 130(3) of the GA Act, the person must comply with the order, unless the person has a reasonable excuse. [36] The Tribunal may give a direction at any time in a proceeding and do whatever is necessary for the speedy and fair conduct of the proceeding.36 [37] As discussed above, the Tribunal must give access to each active party to a document before the start of a hearing, during a hearing and after a hearing.37 The Tribunal may displace the right to access a document or other information only by a confidentiality order.38 Limitation orders and publication of proceedings [38] Generally, information about a guardianship proceeding may be published. However, a person must not, without reasonable excuse, publish information about a guardianship proceeding to the public, or a section of the public, if publication is likely to lead to the identification of the relevant adult by a member of the public or a section of the public to whom the information is published.39 The Tribunal may make an order authorising publication of information about a Tribunal proceeding as provided under s 114A of the GA Act including if the Tribunal is satisfied the publication is in the public interests or the relevant adult’s interest. 36 QCAT Act s 62. 37 GA Act s 130. 38 GA Act s 103(5). 39 GA Act s 114A. -- 12 of 21 -- 13 [39] The GA Act contains relevant provisions for the making of a limitation order that means an adult evidence order, a closure order, a non-publication order and confidentiality order.40 [40] There is power under the GA Act to make a non-publication order to prohibit publication of information or a confidentiality order to withhold from an active party or other person a document or information before a hearing of the proceeding starts.41 However, a non-publication order or confidentiality order made before the hearing is vacated at the start of hearing.42 [41] The Tribunal may make a non-publication or confidentiality order if satisfied it is necessary to avoid serious harm or injustice to a person.43 [42] The GA Act requires the Tribunal to give each active party, and any entity that would be adversely affected by a proposed limitation order standing to be heard in relation to the making of the order.44 Further, the Tribunal is required to give its decision and written reasons as provided under s 112 and s 113 of the GA Act including to give the public advocate all information before the Tribunal in its consideration of making the limitation order, including, for a confidentiality order, the document or other information being considered as the subject of the confidentiality order. What is the power to dismiss a proceeding under s 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)? [43] A QCAT proceeding is at the discretion of the Tribunal, subject to the QCAT Act, an enabling Act and the QCAT Rules.45 The Tribunal, in all proceedings must act fairly and according to the substantial merits of the case.46 In conducting a proceeding it must observe the rules of natural justice47 and is not bound by the rules of evidence, or any practices or procedures applying to courts of record, other than to the extent the Tribunal adopts them and may inform itself in any way it considers appropriate and must act with as little formality and technicality and with as much speed as the requirement of the QCAT Act, an enabling Act or the QCAT Rules and a proper consideration of the matters before the Tribunal permit.48 [44] The Tribunal is also required to take all reasonable steps to ensure each party to a proceeding understands the practices and procedures of the Tribunal, the nature of assertions made in the proceedings and the legal implications of the assertion and, amongst other things, any decision of the Tribunal relating to the proceeding.49 [45] There is power under s 47 of the QCAT Act to dismiss, strike out or bring a proceeding to an early end if the Tribunal considers that the proceeding is frivolous, vexatious or misconceived; or lacking in substance; or otherwise an abuse of process. The Tribunal 40 GA Act s 100. 41 GA Act s 108, s 109, 110. 42 GA Act s 108, s 109, 110. 43 GA Act s 108, s 109. 44 GA Act s 111. 45 QCAT Act s 28(1). 46 QCAT Act s 28(2). 47 QCAT Act s 28(3)(a). 48 QCAT Act s 28. 49 QCAT Act s 29. -- 13 of 21 -- 14 may proceed to dismiss or strike out the proceeding on the application of a party to the proceeding or on the Tribunal’s own initiative.50 [46] It is established law that great care must be exercised in determining whether to dismiss a proceeding summarily and the power should only be exercised in the clearest of cases.51 [47] The term ‘misconceived’ as it appears in s 47 of the QCAT Act is another way to describe a proceeding which lacks substance, force or effect because the Tribunal lacks the jurisdiction to determine the matter.52 A finding that a proceeding is lacking in substance because of the Tribunal’s power to determine the proceeding, and the proceeding should therefore be dismissed requires a consideration of the proceeding and whether the dismissal is warranted. This involves the exercise of a broad discretionary power under s 47 of the QCAT Act and should not be exercised lightly. [48] Before exercising the power under s 47 of the QCAT Act, the Tribunal must be satisfied that notice of the Tribunal’s initiated application to dismiss the proceedings has been given to all parties. Procedural fairness must be afforded to a relevant party by giving the party an opportunity to provide any written submissions and supporting evidence in response to the application to dismiss.53 Further, the exercise of the Tribunal’s power under s 47 to dismiss or strike out the proceeding must be exercised in a way that is consistent with the statutory objects of the QCAT Act to deal with matters in a way that is accessible, fair, just, economical, informal and quick.54 Should the Tribunal exercise the power under s 47 of the QCAT Act to dismiss the proceedings? [49] In the present matter, the Court referred applications to QCAT about DLJ’s capacity and for the appointment of a guardian for determination. [50] As discussed above, DLJ and her husband DQT became aware of these proceedings after a proposed representative from ADA Law contacted DLJ and after referral of the applications by the Court. Further, the Tribunal has directed the relevant parties file written submissions about whether the applications should be dismissed under s 47 of the QCAT Act. [51] I am satisfied that the relevant parties have been given an opportunity to file written submissions. The Tribunal’s directions set out the circumstances giving rise to the Tribunal initiated application to dismiss the proceedings under s 47 of the QCAT Act and puts the parties on notice of the Tribunal’s initiated applications to dismiss the proceedings and to make a confidentiality order and a non-publication order, to be determined on the papers.55 Relevantly, the Tribunal’s directions set out the following information that is relevant to the exercise of my discretion to dismiss the proceedings under s 47 of the QCAT Act: 50 QCAT Act s 47(3). 51 General Steel Industries Inc. v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125. See Dey v Victorian Railway Commissioners (1949) 78 CLR 62. 52 M & J Gray Investments Pty Ltd v AMP Pacific Fair Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] QCAT 454 [11]. 53 QCAT Act s 95. See QCAT Act s 47. 54 QCAT Act s 3. 55 Tribunal’s Directions dated 15 July 2026. -- 14 of 21 -- 15 (a) the Tribunal has received an enduring power of attorney dated 10 January 2026 executed in the State of Queensland and an enduring power of attorney dated 29 January 2026 executed in the State of New South Wales. (b) no health professional or other person is currently asserting a lack of capacity as defined under the GA Act on behalf of DLJ. [52] The written submissions filed by the relevant parties in compliance with the Tribunal’s directions includes evidence filed by DLJ from a health professional.56 As further discussed below, some of the material filed by DQT and DLJ contain sensitive and personal information unrelated to these proceedings. [53] DQT’s written submissions are said to be filed for DLJ, and as stated, ‘at her express current instruction’.57 It is submitted by DQT (on behalf of DLJ) that the applications (GAA8090-26 and GAA8091-26) should be dismissed under s 47 of the QCAT Act as lacking in substance and that no guardian or administrator be appointed and no declaration of impaired capacity be made.58 Further, it is submitted that the matter may be determined on the papers if QCAT dismisses the proceedings and makes as stated, ‘no additional restrictive order’.59 [54] DLJ has filed written submissions and documents on 21 July 2026 that include evidence from a health professional. DLJ refers this Tribunal to the medical evidence filed that was obtained from Dr X and says that this is evidence of her capacity. The relevant extract from DLJ’s written submission dated 25 June 2026 (filed on 21 July 2026) is set out below: The new Dr X letter dated 24 June 2026 is central. It records that I have been diagnosed with catatonia with an unidentified suspected organic cause, including suspected environmental factors such as toxic mould syndrome, pregnancy-related or breastfeeding-related contributors. It states that I am well and have full capacity when there is no catatonia. It records no previous history of psychiatric conditions in me or my family, no alcohol use, no recreational drug use and no cigarettes. It also records that I have a caring relationship with DQT whom I hold in high regards, and that I seem to be recovering well since moving house.60 [55] The Tribunal has also received and considered the written submissions filed by Clayton Utz Solicitors on behalf of Hospital X.61 It is submitted that they support the proposed dismissal of the referred applications by the Court. Further, it is submitted that orders should be made by this Tribunal in the same form of the Order of the Court in circumstances where, amongst other things, the need for and terms of confidentiality and non-publication orders were expressly challenged in the Supreme Court hearing on 18 May 2026 and the Supreme Court rejected the application and re- applied the same orders.62 [56] I am satisfied that it is necessary to exercise the power under s 47 of the QCAT Act to dismiss the proceedings on the basis that the applications are clearly lacking in 56 Written submissions filed 21 July 2026, 25 June 2026 and 18 June 2026. 57 Written submissions filed 21 July 2026. 58 Written submissions filed 21 July 2026. 59 Written submissions filed 21 July 2026. 60 Written submissions filed 21 July 2026. 61 Written submissions filed 29 July 2026. 62 Written submissions filed 29 July 2026. -- 15 of 21 -- 16 substance. If the applications were to proceed to a hearing, it would be necessary for the Tribunal to make its own findings about capacity and for the purposes of the application for the appointment of a guardian, to consider a number of matters as provided under s 12 of the GA Act, including whether the presumption of capacity for the matter is rebutted and there is a need for decisions to be made about DLJ’s personal matters. [57] In my view, the applications for capacity and for the appointment of a guardian cannot proceed in circumstances where no health professional is currently asserting a lack of capacity on behalf of DLJ and relevant to the appointment of a guardian and whether there is a need for decisions to be made about personal matters, there is a decision- making regime in place. Relevantly, there is before the Tribunal an enduring power of attorney for DLJ that provides a legal mechanism for decisions to be made by an appointed attorney about certain matters and in certain circumstances, as provided in the enduring document, including when DLJ is found to not have capacity to make those decisions. [58] The exercise of power to dismiss the current proceedings under s 47 of the QCAT Act is consistent with achieving the purpose of the GA Act to strike an appropriate balance between the right of an adult with impaired capacity to the greatest possible degree of autonomy in decision-making and the adult’s right to adequate and appropriate support for decision-making.63 [59] The Tribunal’s decision to dismiss the proceedings is also the least restrictive with DLJ’s human rights under the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld). In exercising the power to appoint a guardian under the GA Act the Tribunal is acting in an administrative capacity and is a public entity for the purposes of s 58 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld).64 The Tribunal is therefore required to make a decision in a way that is compatible with human rights and in making a decision must give proper consideration to relevant human rights. [60] In the present matter, the Tribunal has considered the relevant human rights under the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) and the requirement under s 48 to interpret all statutory provisions to the extent possible that is consistent with their purpose in a way that is compatible with human rights. As discussed above, the GA Act mandates that a person is presumed to have capacity for the matter until the contrary is proven. The GA Act seeks to strike a balance between the right of a person with impaired capacity to make decisions should be restricted and interfered with to the least possible extent. Further, the general principles reflect relevant rights of a person with impaired decision- making capacity and amongst other things, the right to participate, to the greatest extent practicable, in decisions affecting their life must be recognised and taken into account. [61] I am satisfied that the dismissal of the applications remitted to the Tribunal by Order of the Court is necessary and the least restrictive based on the information and evidence before the Tribunal. 63 GA Act s 6. 64 See NJ [2022] QCAT 283. -- 16 of 21 -- 17 [62] The application for declaration about capacity and for the appointment of a guardian transferred to QCAT by Order of the Court dated 23 December 2025 (GAA8091-26 and GAA8090-26) is dismissed under s 47 of the QCAT Act. I order accordingly. What is the Tribunal’s power to make a confidentiality order and non- publication order under the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld)? [63] The Tribunal has the power to make a non-publication order (under s 108) or confidentiality order (under s 109) if satisfied it is necessary to avoid serious harm or injustice to a person, but only to the extent necessary.65 Further, the Tribunal may make a non-publication order or confidentiality order before a hearing of the proceeding starts. However, a non-publication order or confidentiality order is vacated at the start of the hearing.66 [64] The term ‘injustice’ is not defined under the GA Act. An interpretation that will best achieve the purpose of the Act is to be preferred.67 The Macquarie Dictionary defines ‘injustice’ as ‘unjust action or treatment; violation of another’s rights; an unjust act or circumstance’. [65] A person with impaired capacity is the primary focus of the GA Act and has a right to the presumption of capacity until the contrary is proven and the right to autonomy in decision-making and to adequate and appropriate support for decision-making.68 Further, the Tribunal has a statutory duty under the QCAT Act to deal with matters in a way that is fair, just, economical, informal and quick and to, amongst other things, observe the rules of natural justice.69 [66] In exercising the powers under the GA Act, the Tribunal is required to observe and uphold a person’s relevant rights and interests as reflected in the general principles (s 11B), acknowledgments (s 5) and purpose (s 6) of the Act. In my view, the Tribunal is required to respect and uphold the person’s human rights and fundamental freedoms, to avoid injustice such as unjust action or treatment to the person who is the primary focus of the GA Act. [67] There are relevant provisions under the GA Act that must be observed before making a confidentiality or non-publication order and other types of orders referred to as a ‘limitation order’.70 Importantly, a hearing by the Tribunal of a proceeding must be held in public and as provided under s 103, an active party has a right to access a relevant document in certain circumstances and as provided under the Act.71 A person the Tribunal considers has a sufficient interest in the proceeding must be given a reasonable opportunity to access, within a reasonable time after a hearing, a document before the Tribunal that the Tribunal considered credible, relevant and significant to an issue in the proceeding. [68] The Tribunal may displace the right to access a document or other information only by a confidentiality order.72 The GA Act provides that each active party and any entity 65 See NJ [2022] QCAT 283. 66 GA Act s 110. 67 Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Qld), s 14A. 68 GA Act s 6. 69 QCAT Act s 3, s 28, s 29. 70 See s 100 of the GA Act. See also s 101 of the GA Act that provides that relevant provisions under the QCAT Act do not apply. 71 See GA Act s 119 (definition of ‘active party’). 72 GA Act s 103(5). -- 17 of 21 -- 18 that would be adversely affected by a proposed limitation order, has standing to be heard in relation to the making of the order.73 The Tribunal is also required to give its decision and reasons for the making of a relevant limitation order.74 Should the Tribunal make limitation orders under the GA Act? [69] As discussed above, the Tribunal made a pre-hearing confidentiality order and a pre- hearing non-publication order that are vacated at the start of the hearing. The Tribunal is now required to consider whether to make a confidentiality order and non- publication order in circumstances where the Tribunal has dismissed the applications about capacity and for the appointment of a guardian that were referred to QCAT by Order of the Court made 23 December 2025. [70] It is important to identity the nature of the information and documents that may be the subject of a confidentiality order or non-publication order before the Tribunal. As discussed below, there are documents that were referred to the Tribunal by Order of the Court, written submissions and documents filed in the Tribunal, documents obtained by the Tribunal under s 130 of the GA Act including the transcripts of the Court proceedings. There are also Tribunal Decision and Directions as a result of the pre-hearing steps taken by me to preserve the effectiveness of the Court’s Orders, to protect DLJ’s identity and to ensure that all material was before the Tribunal before the matter was finally determined. [71] In deciding whether to exercise the powers under the GA Act to prohibit publication of information or to withhold from an active party or other person a document, the Tribunal is also required to identify relevant documents that the Tribunal considers is credible, relevant and significant to an issue in the proceeding (s 103).75 [72] It is convenient to set out below details of the information and documents before the Tribunal - (a) information and material concerning DLJ relating to the Supreme Court proceedings that were remitted to the Tribunal by Order of the Court made 23 December 2025 and further Order of the Court made 18 May 2026 including the originating application filed 22 December 2025, the application filed 30 April 2026, statements, affidavits, exhibits, written submissions, documents tendered to the Court in the proceedings of 23 December 2025 and further proceedings of 18 May 2026, parties’ correspondence with the Court from the application of 23 December 2025 and from the application of 18 May 2026. (b) the transcript of the hearing before The Honourable Justice Hindman of the Supreme Court of Queensland on 23 December 2025. (c) the transcript of the hearing before The Honourable Justice Treston of the Supreme Court of Queensland on 18 May 2026. (d) information and material given to the Tribunal on 8 June 2026, in compliance with the Tribunal’s Order dated 26 May 2026 under s 130 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), including the Tribunal’s Order dated 26 73 GA Act s 111. 74 GA Act s 112, s 113. 75 GA Act s 103. -- 18 of 21 -- 19 May 2026 and 11 June 2026, the covering letter and attachments (21 pages). The documents provided contain sensitive and personal information. (e) written submissions and documents filed in the Tribunal by DLJ and DQT including medical reports containing sensitive and personal information, DLJ’s enduring powers of attorney and documents that contain sensitive and confidential information. For example, some of the documents are marked as being ‘protected by parliamentary privilege’, including documents relating to the Supreme Court proceedings and other documents contain sensitive and personal information about health matters, ongoing complaints and requests for information.76 (f) Written submissions filed by Clayton Utz that contains information about the Supreme Court proceedings that are the subject of a confidentiality and suppression order. (g) Tribunal’s Directions dated 26 May 2026, 10 June 2026 and 15 July 2026 (h) Tribunal’s Decisions dated 26 May 2026, 11 June 2026. (i) Tribunal’s Order and Reasons dated 20 August 2026 that identify DLJ and information about the Tribunal’s proceedings. [73] In determining whether it is necessary in the current circumstances to make a confidentiality order to withhold a document or a non-publication order to prohibit publication of information about the proceeding, the publication of which is not prohibited under s 114A of GA Act, I must be satisfied that the order is necessary to avoid injustice to DLJ. Relevantly, s 114A provides that a person must not, without reasonable excuse, publish information about a guardianship proceeding to the public, or a section of the public, if the publication is likely to lead to the identification of the relevant adult. [74] The Tribunal has given the relevant parties an opportunity to provide written submissions about the making of a confidentiality order and non-publication order. [75] DLJ does not seek or consent to any new QCAT non-publication or confidentiality order and seeks, as stated in her written submissions, ‘authorisation under s 114A(5) for publication of her identity and her own QCAT material, subject to the existing Supreme Court order’.77 [76] Unless the Tribunal makes an order authorising publication of information about a Tribunal proceeding as provided under s 114A of the GA Act, publication of information about the guardianship proceeding is protected. In the present matter, there is no application before me seeking an order under s 114A(5) of the GA Act. [77] I am satisfied that a confidentiality order and non-publication order is necessary to protect the disclosure of the material referred to QCAT by Order of the Court that is the subject of confidentiality orders. This requires me to make orders necessary to protect the identify of DLJ, her family members and health professionals and the disclosure of documents and other information in relation to the Supreme Court proceedings. Disclosure of information about the Tribunal’s proceedings will identify 76 Written submissions filed on 18 June 2026. 77 Written submissions filed 21 July 2026. -- 19 of 21 -- 20 DLJ and information relating to the Supreme Court proceedings that is protected by confidentiality orders made by Order of the Court. [78] The material and information provided to the Tribunal under s 130 of the GA Act and filed by DLJ and DQT should also be the subject of a confidentiality order and a non- publication order to preserve the effectiveness of the Court’s Order and to avoid injustice to DLJ in circumstances where the applications referred by the Court have been dismissed summarily under s 47 of the QCAT Act and the documents contain sensitive and personal information. [79] The Tribunal is satisfied that the disclosure of information contained in the documents or material before the Tribunal other than the documents identified in the Tribunal’s Order for the purposes of s 103 of the GA Act (discussed below), about DLJ would contravene the orders put in place by the Court. An order prohibiting publication of information and restricting access to documents about DLJ is necessary to avoid injustice to DLJ in circumstances where the Court has made confidentiality orders suppressing the identity of DLJ and her family members and relevant documents filed in the Supreme Court proceedings that have been remitted to QCAT. [80] The Tribunal will make orders that effectively mirror the orders made by the Court in relation to the documents remitted to QCAT, the documents filed in the Tribunal and obtained by the Tribunal under s 130 of the GA Act. The Tribunal will also make orders necessary to prohibit publication of information under s 108 of the GA Act on the basis that publication of the information about the Supreme Court proceedings and Tribunal proceedings will lead to the identification of DLJ. Again, the Tribunal will make orders that effectively mirror the orders made by the Court in relation relevant documents filed in the Supreme Court proceedings and documents filed in the Tribunal. As discussed above, some of the documents filed by DLJ and DQT contain sensitive and private information, include documents relating to the Supreme Court proceedings and other documents that are identified as being ‘sensitive’ and confidential. [81] I am satisfied that the Orders made today under s 108 and s 109 of the GA Act are necessary to avoid injustice to DLJ and to preserve the effectiveness of the Court’s Order. The Tribunal’s Orders made under s 108 and s 109 of the GA Act are consistent with and uphold DLJ’s rights as reflected in the general principles under s 11B of the GA Act including DLJ’s right to privacy and the right to have her personal information protected (s 11B(6)). The Tribunal’s Orders made today are the least restrictive with DLJ’s human rights under the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) based on the information and evidence before me. [82] For the purposes of complying with s 112 and s 113 of GA Act, the Tribunal’s Reasons are the written reasons for the making of the confidently order and non-publication order. The Tribunal has also considered and made orders today identifying information to be given to the Public Advocate for the purposes of s 112(5) of the GA Act to preserve the effectiveness of the Orders of the Supreme Court of Queensland. [83] For the purposes of complying with a request under s 103 of the GA Act, the Tribunal has made orders identifying relevant documents that may be disclosed to relevant persons that the Tribunal considered is credible, relevant and significant to an issue in the proceeding. As reflected in the Tribunal’s Order, any relevant document for the purpose of access as provided under s 103 will be redacted and anonymised, as necessary, to ensure that information about the Supreme Court proceedings and -- 20 of 21 -- 21 Tribunal’s proceedings is not disclosed. Further, information that may identify DLJ and her family and the nature of any document given to the Tribunal under s 130 of the GA Act and by DLJ and DQT other than the enduring power of attorney is not to be disclosed. This is because the documents filed in the Tribunal contain sensitive and confidential information relating to reports by a health professional, documents relating to the Supreme Court proceedings and other documents that contain sensitive and confidential information that I do not consider are directly relevant to these proceedings that I have dismissed under s 47 of the QCAT Act. [84] To preserve the Tribunal’s orders made under s 109 and s 108 of the GA Act, the Tribunal will Order that the protected documents be placed in a sealed envelope which may only be opened by further Order of QCAT or by a Judge of the Supreme Court and that the file must not be made available for search by any person. [85] The Tribunal will publish two sets of reasons. One set of reasons identifying relevant names and information will be given to DLJ and her husband, DQT. A copy of the Tribunal’s Order and Reasons will also be given to the Registrar of the Court to be placed in a sealed envelope and to be properly titled that the Tribunal’s Order and Reasons are only to be opened by a Judge of the Supreme Court. [86] Another set of reasons that have been de-identified and any relevant parts of the Reasons redacted, only to the extent necessary to preserve the effectiveness of the Tribunal’s Order and to ensure that there is no contravention of the Supreme Court Order made 23 December 2025 and further Order made 18 May 2026, will be published. [87] A de-identified and redacted form of Order and Reasons will be given to Clayton Utz as the legal representative for Hospital X and any active party in the proceeding. A redacted form of Order and Reasons will also be given to the Public Advocate in compliance with s 112(5) of the GA Act. This is necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the Order of the Court and the Tribunal’s Order today that requires relevant information and documents about DLJ to be kept confidential and not made available to any person. [88] I make orders accordingly. -- 21 of 21 --