FHJ v Public Guardian [2022] NSWCATAD 168

FHJ v Public Guardian [2022] NSWCATAD 168

The application was dismissed because the applicants failed to identify a final reviewable decision by the Public Guardian or demonstrate that internal review requirements were met or excepted; thus, the substantive relief sought could not be granted and the application was misconceived.

Parties
Applicant: FHF; Applicant: FHK; Respondent: Public Guardian
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Summary Dismissal Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Review of Decision of Public Guardian, Summary Dismissal, Internal Review Requirements, Publication Prohibition

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FHF

Applicant

FHK

Applicant

Public Guardian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review / Summary Dismissal Application

  1. 1 Whether there was a reviewable decision of the Public Guardian to enliven Tribunal's jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether the application should be summarily dismissed as misconceived for lack of a reviewable decision or finalisation of an internal review

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the applicants failed to identify a final reviewable decision by the Public Guardian or demonstrate that internal review requirements were met or excepted; thus, the substantive relief sought could not be granted and the application was misconceived.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • An oral hearing of the summary dismissal application is dispensed with under s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.
  • The summary dismissal application is granted.