UFH [2015] NSWCATGD 58

UFH [2015] NSWCATGD 58

The Tribunal was not satisfied on the balance of the evidence that Ms UFH was incapable of consenting to the proposed special medical treatment. It placed great weight on Prof Z's clinical opinion that Ms UFH had capacity, and found she had good knowledge of the procedure, its risks, the consequence of sterilisation, and available alternatives. Because incapacity was not established, the application for consent to special medical treatment was dismissed. On review, although Ms UFH remained a person about whom a guardianship order could be made, there was no evidence of any area requiring a guardian and services and care were likely to continue without an order, so a further guardianship...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Consent to Special Medical Treatment and Review of Guardianship Order / Reconvened Hearing Before the Guardianship Division
Outcome
Application for consent to special medical treatment dismissed; guardianship order lapsed and revoked for any remaining period.
Legal Topics
['special Medical Treatment' 'capacity to Consent' 'presumption of Capacity' 'laparoscopic Hysterectomy and Bilateral Salpingectomy' 'review of Guardianship Order']
['guardianship' 'medical Treatment Consent'] ['special Medical Treatment' 'capacity to Consent' 'presumption of Capacity' 'laparoscopic Hysterectomy and Bilateral Salpingectomy' 'review of Guardianship Order']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Consent to Special Medical Treatment and Review of Guardianship Order / Reconvened Hearing Before the Guardianship Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Ms UFH was incapable of giving consent to the proposed laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilateral salpingectomy under the Guardianship Act 1987 (NSW).' 'Whether the Tribunal should consent to the proposed special medical treatment.' 'Whether a further guardianship order should be made for Ms UFH on review.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was not satisfied on the balance of the evidence that Ms UFH was incapable of consenting to the proposed special medical treatment. It placed great weight on Prof Z's clinical opinion that Ms UFH had capacity, and found she had good knowledge of the procedure, its risks, the consequence of sterilisation, and available alternatives. Because incapacity was not established, the application for consent to special medical treatment was dismissed. On review, although Ms UFH remained a person about whom a guardianship order could be made, there was no evidence of any area requiring a guardian and services and care were likely to continue without an order, so a further guardianship...

Court Disposition

Application for consent to special medical treatment dismissed; guardianship order lapsed and revoked for any remaining period.

Orders

  • ['The application for consent to special medical treatment made by Mrs TGN in respect of Miss UFH is dismissed.' 'The guardianship order concerning Miss UFH made on 16 March 2015 is to lapse.' 'The guardianship order is revoked for any remaining period of the order.']