SZF [2019] NSWCATGD 12

SZF [2019] NSWCATGD 12

The summonsed material, including the redacted version, recorded confidential communications between SZF and his lawyer in wide-ranging discussions about personal and financial affairs and advice regarding the legal context of those affairs, including the enduring power of attorney and enduring guardianship appointment. The dominant purpose was the provision of legal advice, not merely the production of the instruments. SZF had not waived privilege by defending applications made by others, and access by the applicants was not essential because evidence could be sought directly from SZF and the solicitor. Section 67 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) therefore did not...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Access to Material Provided Under Summons in Guardianship, Financial Management, Review of Enduring Guardianship Appointment and Review of Enduring Power of Attorney Proceedings / Decision on Access to Summonsed Documents Where Legal Professional Privilege Was Claimed
Outcome
The applicants were denied access to the documents provided by Bestic Law including the redacted packet.
Legal Topics
['access to Documents Produced Under Summons' 'legal Advice Privilege' 'dominant Purpose Test' 'enduring Power of Attorney' 'enduring Guardianship' 'protective Jurisdiction' 'waiver of Privilege']
['administrative Law' 'guardianship' 'evidence' 'legal Professional Privilege'] ['access to Documents Produced Under Summons' 'legal Advice Privilege' 'dominant Purpose Test' 'enduring Power of Attorney' 'enduring Guardianship' 'protective Jurisdiction' 'waiver of Privilege']

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

Interlocutory Application for Access to Material Provided Under Summons in Guardianship, Financial Management, Review of Enduring Guardianship Appointment and Review of Enduring Power of Attorney Proceedings / Decision on Access to Summonsed Documents Where Legal Professional Privilege Was Claimed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether documents produced under summons by Bestic Law were subject to legal professional privilege.' 'Whether records of lawyer-client communications concerning enduring power of attorney and enduring guardianship instruments were prepared for the dominant purpose of providing legal advice.' 'Whether SZF waived legal advice privilege by defending applications made by others.' "Whether access to the summonsed material was necessary for the proper exercise of the Tribunal's jurisdiction."]

Ratio Decidendi

The summonsed material, including the redacted version, recorded confidential communications between SZF and his lawyer in wide-ranging discussions about personal and financial affairs and advice regarding the legal context of those affairs, including the enduring power of attorney and enduring guardianship appointment. The dominant purpose was the provision of legal advice, not merely the production of the instruments. SZF had not waived privilege by defending applications made by others, and access by the applicants was not essential because evidence could be sought directly from SZF and the solicitor. Section 67 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) therefore did not...

Court Disposition

The applicants were denied access to the documents provided by Bestic Law including the redacted packet.

Orders

  • ['The applicants are denied access to the documents provided by Bestic Law including the redacted packet.']