LZ v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2012] NSWADTAP 36

Administrative Decisions Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: LZ v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2012] NSWADTAP 36 Hearing dates: 24 July 2012 Decision date: 04 October 2012 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel - Internal Before: Magistrate N Hennessy, Deputy President Decision: A person is appointed to represent LZ in these proceedings pursuant to s 71(4)-(4A) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997. Catchwords: APPEAL - appointment of guardian ad litem to represent a party who is the subject of a guardianship order Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: LZ (Appellant) NSW Trustee and Guardian (1st Respondent) Imelda Dodds (2nd Respondent) Guardianship Tribunal (3rd Respondent) Representation: LZ (Appellant in person) K Bozinovska (1st and 2nd Respondents) File Number(s): 128005 Publication restriction: s 126 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 applies. Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9113 Citation: 2011/7743 Date of Decision: 2012-05-21 00:00:00 File Number(s): C/31088

REASON FOR DECISION 1LZ appealed to the Tribunal against a decision of the Guardianship Tribunal to make a guardianship order in relation to her and to appoint the Public Guardian as her guardian. At a Directions Hearing in relation to this appeal the Tribunal ordered that a person from the NSW government's guardian ad litem panel be appointed to represent LZ in these proceedings. LZ objected to a person being appointed to represent her and has asked for written reasons for that decision. 2In relation to external appeals against a decision by the Guardianship Tribunal to make a guardianship order, the Tribunal has power to appoint any person the Tribunal thinks fit to represent a party in respect of whom a guardianship order has been made: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act s 71(4)-(4A). On 21 May 2012 the Guardianship Tribunal made a guardianship order in relation to LZ. LZ has appealed against that decision. Consequently this Tribunal has power to appoint a person to represent LZ. Despite LZ's strenuous objections to a person being appointed to represent her, the Tribunal decided to exercise that power in this case on the basis of the medical evidence described in the Guardianship Tribunal's reasons for decision. 3LZ also asked the Tribunal for written reasons for rejecting her application that I disqualify myself from hearing her case. LZ did not apply for me to disqualify myself at the Directions Hearing but merely foreshadowed that she would do so in the future when she had a solicitor. As no application for disqualification has been made, no decision has been made in relation to that issue and no reasons can be provided.