NSW Caselaw
NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: LNS [2016] NSWCATGD 52 Hearing dates: 8 December 2016 Date of orders: 08 December 2016 Decision date: 08 December 2016 Jurisdiction: Guardianship Division Before: L Organ, Senior Member (Legal) Dr M Martin, Senior Member (Professional) B Epstein-Frisch, General Member (Community) Decision: The application for a guardianship order to be made for Mr LNS is dismissed. Catchwords: GUARDIANSHIP – application for guardianship order – National Disability Insurance Scheme – nominee provisions – family member 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: HKO [2016] NSWCATGD 14 IF v IG [2004] NSWADTAP 3 KTT [2014] NSWCATGD 6 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mr LNS (subject person) Ms KGX (carer) Ms NXQ (applicant) The NSW Public Guardian File Number(s): 63487 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 dismissed the application made by Ms NXQ for a guardianship order for Mr LNS.
Background 1. Mr LNS is an 18-year-old man who resides with his foster mother, Ms KGX, and her daughter, Miss CPT, at west Sydney. Mr LNS suffered hypoxic brain damage at birth and was previously under the care of the Minister until he recently turned 18. 2. On 23 August 2016, the Tribunal received an application for guardianship order from a case worker from community services provider. 3. On 28 October 2016, Ms NXQ, case manager from the community services provider became the substitute applicant in the proceedings. 4. In the application a guardian is said to be required as although Mr LNS has a National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) Plan, which has been implemented, Miss CPT and Miss KGX would like to have authority to make all care-related decisions on Mr LNS's behalf.
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