GJ and Ors v Protective Commissioner [2005] NSWADT 66

GJ and Ors v Protective Commissioner [2005] NSWADT 66

The Protective Commissioner is not strictly limited by the amount of past gratuitous care allowed in a damages award or settlement; the statutory and inherent jurisdictions allow payment up to the reasonable market value of services rendered, provided the estate is sufficient and the protected person's future needs are safeguarded.

Parties
Applicant: GJ and Ors; Respondent: Protective Commissioner
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Review / Preliminary Question Ruling
Outcome
preliminary question answered in favour of applicants
Legal Topics
Protected Estates Act, Gratuitous Care Payments, Statutory and Inherent Jurisdiction

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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GJ and Ors

Applicant

Protective Commissioner

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Review / Preliminary Question Ruling

  1. 1 Whether it is lawful for the Protective Commissioner to make a payment pursuant to s 28(1)(b) of the Protected Estates Act for past gratuitous care which exceeds the amount of that component of the damages award

Ratio Decidendi

The Protective Commissioner is not strictly limited by the amount of past gratuitous care allowed in a damages award or settlement; the statutory and inherent jurisdictions allow payment up to the reasonable market value of services rendered, provided the estate is sufficient and the protected person's future needs are safeguarded.

Court Disposition

preliminary question answered in favour of applicants

Orders

  • The Question is answered 'yes'.
  • Directions to be made for the final hearing of the application.