FKT [2020] NSWCATGD 96

FKT [2020] NSWCATGD 96

The enduring guardianship appointment was not operating effectively because the appointed guardians were divided by serious family conflict, distrust and inability to agree on fundamental decisions concerning FKT's care and access to family members. Given FKT's dementia and declining functioning, the need for decisions about accommodation, access, health care, medical and dental treatment and services, and the impracticability of informal decision-making, it was in FKT's best interests to revoke the enduring guardianship appointment and make a guardianship order. WBT and NST were suitable private guardians for accommodation, health, medical and dental consent and services decisions, but...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Review of an Enduring Guardianship Appointment and Guardianship Application / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
The enduring guardianship appointment was revoked, the review application was treated as an application for a guardianship order, and a 12-month limited continuing guardianship order was made appointing the Public Guardian for access decisions and NST and WBT jointly for other specified functions.
Legal Topics
['review of Enduring Guardianship Appointment' 'revocation of Enduring Guardianship' 'guardianship Order' 'family Conflict' 'appointment of Private Guardians and Public Guardian' 'access, Accommodation, Health Care, Medical and Dental Consent, And Services Functions']
['guardianship' 'administrative Law'] ['review of Enduring Guardianship Appointment' 'revocation of Enduring Guardianship' 'guardianship Order' 'family Conflict' 'appointment of Private Guardians and Public Guardian' 'access, Accommodation, Health Care, Medical and Dental Consent, and Services Functions']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Review of an Enduring Guardianship Appointment and Guardianship Application / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appointment of WBT, NST and LNT as enduring guardians for FKT should be revoked or confirmed.' 'Whether the review application should be treated as an application for a guardianship order.' 'Whether FKT has a disability preventing her from making important life decisions such that a guardianship order could be made.' 'Whether a guardianship order should be made and what functions should be conferred.' 'Who should be appointed guardian and for how long.']

Ratio Decidendi

The enduring guardianship appointment was not operating effectively because the appointed guardians were divided by serious family conflict, distrust and inability to agree on fundamental decisions concerning FKT's care and access to family members. Given FKT's dementia and declining functioning, the need for decisions about accommodation, access, health care, medical and dental treatment and services, and the impracticability of informal decision-making, it was in FKT's best interests to revoke the enduring guardianship appointment and make a guardianship order. WBT and NST were suitable private guardians for accommodation, health, medical and dental consent and services decisions, but...

Court Disposition

The enduring guardianship appointment was revoked, the review application was treated as an application for a guardianship order, and a 12-month limited continuing guardianship order was made appointing the Public Guardian for access decisions and NST and WBT jointly for other specified functions.

Orders

  • ['The appointment of WBT, NST and LNT as an enduring guardian is revoked.' 'The application for review is treated as if it were an application under the Guardianship Act 1987 (NSW) for a guardianship order for FKT.' 'A guardianship order is made for FKT.' 'The Public Guardian is appointed guardian separately to the...