DJC [2016] NSWCATGD 27

NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: DJC [2016] NSWCATGD 27 Hearing dates: 20 September 2016 Date of orders: 20 September 2016 Decision date: 20 September 2016 Jurisdiction: Guardianship Division Before: C Fougere, Principal Member Decision: 1. The financial management order made on 9 January 2014 in relation to the estate of Mrs DJC is revoked.

2. The manager, Mr DJC is to pay over or hand over the estate to Mrs DJC. Catchwords: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT – application to revoke financial management order – revocation in best interests of the protected person – requirements of the NSW Trustee and surety bonds Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), sch 6, cl 5(1) Guardianship Act 1987 (NSW), s 4 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mrs DJC (protected person) Mr DJC (spouse and applicant) The NSW Trustee and Guardian Representation: Nil File Number(s): 55049 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 revoked the financial management order made in relation to Mrs DJC on 9 January 2014.

Background 1. Mrs DJC is a 51-year-old woman who lives with her husband, Mr DJC, in their home in northwest Sydney. Mr and Mrs DJC have three children, two of whom still live with their parents, the youngest being 14 years of age. 2. On 30 October 2013, Mrs DJC experienced a cerebral artery aneurism that led to a lengthy period of hospitalisation and rehabilitation. Mr DJC applied for the appointment of a financial manager for his wife in the months following that event. At the time of the hearing before the Tribunal on 9 January 2014, Mrs DJC was in a coma and evidence was provided by Mr DJC that a financial manager was needed to organise her financial affairs, to possibly sell their family home and to enable access to be gained to an education fund for their children but that was in Mrs DJC's name alone. 3. On 9 January 2014, the Tribunal appointed Mr DJC as his wife's financial manager subject to the authority and directions of the NSW Trustee and Guardian. 4. On 25 July 2016, Mr DJC applied to have the financial management order revoked. This application was made with the support of Mrs DJC and other members of her family. In the application, and in other evidence to the Tribunal, Mr DJC indicated that despite the seriousness of his wife's health following the aneurism, the improvement in her health has been greater than the doctor's first anticipated. With the order in place, Mr and Mrs DJC have sold their former home and bought a new home in joint names in northwest Sydney. Mrs DJC has also accessed the National Disability Insurance Scheme and receives funding for 38 hours per week for a carer to provide rehabilitation services. 5. Mr DJC's written application to the Tribunal also outlined as a basis for seeking revocation the costs associated with the oversight provided by the NSW Trustee and Guardian. These factors were set out at paragraph 3.2 of the application as follows: 1. it is disadvantaging Mrs DJC financially with annual fees (including a surety bond) totalling more than $1,200; 2. it is restricting Mrs DJC from leading a normal life because our money is in joint accounts and we need to seek approval to spend money outside of general living expenses; 3. the new surety bond fee penalises Mrs DJC financially if we wish to restructure our finances to take advantage of the tax-free threshold now that Mrs DJC no longer receives an income; 4. Mrs DJC did not have a say when the financial management order was put in place because she could not speak. 1. At the hearing, Mrs DJC gave clear and cogent evidence that she wished to have the order revoked and that she would like her husband to continue to manage their joint finances. Mrs DJC informed the Tribunal that her husband always discusses everything with her, including financial matters, and she is very happy with the way that that works. 2. The application for revocation was also supported by Mr and Mrs DJC's two eldest children, one of whom attended the hearing with her parents. The Tribunal was also provided with a number of letters from family, friends, and associates of Mr and Mrs DJC who consistently wrote of Mr DJC's integrity supported the revocation of the order.