NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: HBQ [2015] NSWCATGD 33 Hearing dates: 6 May 2015 Date of orders: 06 May 2015 Decision date: 06 May 2015 Jurisdiction: Guardianship Division Before: S Taylor, Senior Member (Professional) Decision: The Tribunal confirmed the recognition in NSW of the private manager appointed in Western Australia; recognition order to be reviewed within three years and six months of this order. The Tribunal revoked the recognition in NSW of the private guardian appointed in Western Australia. Catchwords: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT – where the protected person is a permanent resident of Western Australia – property in New South Wales – need for recognition order for any future sale of property – NSW Trustee and Guardian supportive of recognition order GUARDIANSHIP – where the protected person is a permanent resident of Western Australia but visits New South Wales – no current need for recognition of Western Australia guardianship order in NSW – ability to provide consent informally – recognition revoked Legislation Cited: Guardianship Act 1987 (NSW) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mr HBQ (the protected person) Ms KEQ (daughter, financial manager, and guardian) The State Administrative Tribunal Western Australia The NSW Trustee and Guardian Representation: Nil File Number(s): 53259 Publication restriction: Decisions of the Guardianship Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal have been anonymised to remove any information that may identify any person involved in the Tribunal's proceedings (s 65, Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)). REASONS FOR DECISION What the Tribunal decided 1. The Tribunal confirmed the recognition in NSW of Ms KEQ as financial manager of Mr HBQ. This recognition order is to be reviewed within three years and six months of the date of this order. 2. The Tribunal revoked the recognition in NSW of Ms KEQ as guardian of Mr HBQ. Background 1. Mr HBQ is an 86-year old man who lives in his home in Perth with his daughter and carer, Ms KEQ. He is said to suffer from dementia. Mr HBQ owns a property in New South Wales ('NSW'). 2. On 26 February 2013 the State Administrative Tribunal, Western Australia, appointed Ms KEQ as Mr HBQ's guardian, and this order is to be reviewed by 23 February 2018. 3. On 26 February 2013 the State Administrative Tribunal, Western Australia, also appointed Ms KEQ as the administrator of Mr HBQ's estate. On 10 September 2013, this order was reviewed and amended, and the order is due to be reviewed in Western Australia by 10 September 2018. 4. On 7 May 2013 the NSW Guardianship Tribunal ordered that Ms KEQ's appointment as Mr HBQ's guardian and financial manager be recognised in NSW for a period of two years. The matter before this Tribunal was the end of term review of these recognition orders. The Hearing 1. At the end of these Reasons for Decision are lists of the parties to the application and witnesses who attended the hearing. [appendix removed for publication] What did the Tribunal have to decide? 1. The issue for the Tribunal to decide was whether the recognition of the Western Australian guardianship and financial management orders for Mr HBQ should be confirmed, varied or revoked, according to section 48B(5) of the Guardianship Act 1987 (NSW). The Evidence 1. The Tribunal spoke with Ms KEQ, who told the Tribunal that Mr HBQ is frail and his condition is deteriorating, however she is currently managing his care at home, and it is not possible to predict if or when a move may become necessary. Ms KEQ said Mr HBQ has lived in Western Australia for more than 30 years, however they come to NSW for around two weeks each year to visit family. Last year Mr HBQ required hospitalisation whilst in Sydney, and it was useful to have the guardianship order recognised in NSW. Ms KEQ said however that she would be happy for the recognition of her appointment as guardian to be revoked, as Mr HBQ is a permanent resident of Western Australia. 2. Ms KEQ said there are currently no plans to sell Mr HBQ's property in NSW. However if he needs to move to a nursing home in the future, the property may need to be sold to pay the accommodation bond. Ms KEQ said she and her brother would like her appointment by the Western Australian State Administrative Tribunal as the administrator of Mr HBQ's estate to remain recognised in NSW. Mr HBQ does own his own home, which could be sold if he were to move, and he also has shares, however the recognition of the appointment in NSW gives them a sense of security that the NSW property can be easily sold if necessary. 3. Mr HBQ told the Tribunal that he is happy with his current situation, and would like his daughter, Ms KEQ, to continue to make decisions for him. 4. The Tribunal also spoke with a Liaison Officer from NSW Trustee and Guardian, who said the financial management order would need to be recognised in NSW if the property were to be sold, and the NSW Trustee and Guardian would have no objection to the recognition of Ms KEQ as financial manager continuing. Consideration 1. The Tribunal was satisfied that there was no need to continue the recognition in NSW of Ms KEQ as guardian of Mr HBQ, as he is a permanent resident of Western Australia and there are no plans for him to move to NSW. Should he require treatment whilst visiting NSW, Ms KEQ is his carer and guardian in Western Australia, and can provide consents informally on his behalf. 2. The Tribunal decided to confirm the recognition in NSW of Ms KEQ as financial manager of Mr HBQ. All those involved in the hearing agreed that this was appropriate, as there may be a need to sell Mr HBQ's property in NSW to fund his accommodation in the future. The Tribunal decided that the recognition order should be reviewed within three years and six months of the date of the order, to coincide approximately with the review of the order in Western Australia in September 2018. ********** I hereby certify that this is a true and accurate record of the reasons for decision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales. Registrar DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 02 December 2015