CCP v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2015] NSWCATAD 256
The respondent's decision was made after the managed person's death, by which time management of the estate had terminated. It was not an exercise of a function under Division 1 of Part 4.5 and was not made in connection with the exercise of those functions because the connection required by s 62 is contemporaneous with management of the estate. The later assessment of past error or mismanagement and possible reimbursement or liability from public funds was not a reviewable decision under s 62, so the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 December 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Administrative Review of a Decision of the NSW Trustee and Guardian Not to Approve Reimbursement to a Deceased Managed Person's Estate / Jurisdiction Determined on the Papers
- Outcome
- The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine the application for review of the respondent's decision.
- Legal Topics
- ['tribunal Jurisdiction' 'financial Management Order' 'termination of Management by Death' 'reviewable Decision' 'reimbursement to Estate']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Administrative Review of a Decision of the NSW Trustee and Guardian Not to Approve Reimbursement to a Deceased Managed Person's Estate / Jurisdiction Determined on the Papers
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether the Civil and Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to review the NSW Trustee and Guardian's decision not to approve reimbursement of $7,167.17 withdrawn from the applicant's late brother's bank account during a period of financial management." "Whether the respondent's decision was made in connection with the exercise of the NSW Trustee's functions under Division 1 of Part 4.5 of the NSW Trustee and Guardian Act 2009."]
Ratio Decidendi
The respondent's decision was made after the managed person's death, by which time management of the estate had terminated. It was not an exercise of a function under Division 1 of Part 4.5 and was not made in connection with the exercise of those functions because the connection required by s 62 is contemporaneous with management of the estate. The later assessment of past error or mismanagement and possible reimbursement or liability from public funds was not a reviewable decision under s 62, so the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction.
Court Disposition
The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine the application for review of the respondent's decision.
Orders
- ["The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine the application for review of the respondent's decision."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment