NSW Caselaw
NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: SAQ [2016] NSWCATGD 47 Hearing dates: 14 October 2016 Date of orders: 14 October 2016 Decision date: 14 October 2016 Jurisdiction: Guardianship Division Before: A Boxall, Senior Member (Legal) Dr C West, Senior Member (Professional) B Epstein-Frisch, General Member (Community) Decision: The application for a guardianship order to be made for Mr SAQ is dismissed. Catchwords: GUARDIANSHIP – application for guardianship order – National Disability Insurance Scheme – long-standing friend willing to advocate in relation to NDIS issues – application dismissed Legislation Cited: Guardianship Act 1987 (NSW), ss 3(1), 3(2), 4, 14, 14(2) Cases Cited: IF v IG [2004] NSWADTAP 3 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mr SAQ (subject person) Mr TMD (applicant) File Number(s): 33388 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
GUARDIANSHIP APPLICATION
What the Tribunal decided 1. The Tribunal dismissed the application for guardianship in relation to Mr SAQ made by Mr TMD.
Background 1. Mr SAQ is 64-years-old, and lives in northwest Sydney, in supported accommodation managed by rehabilitation and disability service provider (service provider). He has been diagnosed with an intellectual disability, and his father had supported him until his death in February 2006. On 21 June 2006, the Tribunal appointed the Public Guardian as Mr SAQ's guardian for a period of three years, with the functions of health care and medical and dental consents, and appointed the NSW Trustee and Guardian as his financial manager. The guardianship order lapsed in June 2009. On 20 July 2016, the Tribunal received the present application from a Service Provider Area Manager from service provider, and on 6 October 2016, Mr TMD became the substitute applicant. The purpose of this hearing is to determine that application.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate