Mao v B T Funds Management Limited & Ors [2021] NSWCA 295

Mao v B T Funds Management Limited & Ors [2021] NSWCA 295

There is no arguable basis for challenging the orders of the primary judge because the appointment and actions of the tutor, the discontinuance, and the settlement were valid in law for a person lacking capacity, and Ms Mao's constitutional and procedural arguments are unmeritorious, irrelevant or previously determined.

Parties
First Applicant: Youhua Mao; Second Applicant: Guardian of The Land of Peace; First Respondent: BT Funds Management Limited; Second Respondent: AIA Australia Limited; Third Respondent: Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd; Fourth Respondent: NSW Trustee and Guardian; Fifth Respondent: The Commonwealth of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal – Determination of Summons for Leave to Appeal and Notice of Motion
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal and notice of motion dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Discontinuance of Proceedings, Tutor for Person Under Disability, Statutory Challenge, Superannuation
Civil Procedure Leave to Appeal Discontinuance of Proceedings Tutor for Person Under Disability Statutory Challenge Superannuation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Youhua Mao

First Applicant

Guardian of The Land of Peace

Second Applicant

BT Funds Management Limited

First Respondent

AIA Australia Limited

Second Respondent

Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd

Third Respondent

NSW Trustee and Guardian

Fourth Respondent

The Commonwealth of Australia

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal – Determination of Summons for Leave to Appeal and Notice of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the discontinuance of proceedings by a tutor was void and should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had an arguable basis to challenge the primary judge's orders dismissing her motions
  3. 3 Whether self-representation is permitted for a person under legal incapacity

Ratio Decidendi

There is no arguable basis for challenging the orders of the primary judge because the appointment and actions of the tutor, the discontinuance, and the settlement were valid in law for a person lacking capacity, and Ms Mao's constitutional and procedural arguments are unmeritorious, irrelevant or previously determined.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal and notice of motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicant’s summons for leave to appeal and notice of motion filed on 17 November 2021 are dismissed with costs.