LZ v Protective Commissioner [2006] NSWADT 248

LZ v Protective Commissioner [2006] NSWADT 248

The Tribunal accepted evidence of the Protective Commissioner's usual business practices and contemporaneous electronic records, and inferred that LZ was notified of the 6 January 2006 internal review decision in the ordinary course. The application filed on 1 May 2006 was therefore out of time. Balancing prejudice to the Protective Commissioner, the arguability and likelihood of success of LZ's proposed review, and the need to have regard to LZ's best interests as a protected person, the Tribunal refused leave for the matter to proceed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of a Decision of the Protective Commissioner / Consideration of Respondent's Objection That the Application Was Out of Time and Whether Leave to Proceed Should Be Granted
Outcome
Application for review out of time; leave to proceed not granted.
Legal Topics
['late Application to Tribunal' 'internal Review' 'extension of Time' "protected Person's Estate" 'protective Commissioner']
['administrative Law' 'protective Jurisdiction'] ['late Application to Tribunal' 'internal Review' 'extension of Time' "protected Person's Estate" 'protective Commissioner']

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

Application for Review of a Decision of the Protective Commissioner / Consideration of Respondent's Objection That the Application Was Out of Time and Whether Leave to Proceed Should Be Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether LZ was notified of the internal review decision in January 2006 or only received it on 3 April 2006.' 'Whether the application for review filed on 1 May 2006 was out of time.' 'Whether leave should be granted for the application to proceed out of time.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal accepted evidence of the Protective Commissioner's usual business practices and contemporaneous electronic records, and inferred that LZ was notified of the 6 January 2006 internal review decision in the ordinary course. The application filed on 1 May 2006 was therefore out of time. Balancing prejudice to the Protective Commissioner, the arguability and likelihood of success of LZ's proposed review, and the need to have regard to LZ's best interests as a protected person, the Tribunal refused leave for the matter to proceed.

Court Disposition

Application for review out of time; leave to proceed not granted.

Orders

  • ['Application for review out of time.' 'Leave to proceed is not granted.']