NU v Protective Commissioner [2005] NSWADT 62

NU v Protective Commissioner [2005] NSWADT 62

The Tribunal affirmed the sale decision because the evidence from professionals showed NU could not live independently and would require nursing home or supported accommodation for the foreseeable future, she required more intensive support and attendant care, and her existing income was insufficient to fund those services or sustain her position long term. Sale of the house was found to be the only way to fund the services NU needed, despite NU's express wishes and distress about the sale.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of the Protective Commissioner's Decision to Sell Nu's House / Principal Matter
Outcome
The decision of the Protective Commissioner to sell NU's property was affirmed.
Legal Topics
['review of Protective Commissioner Decision' "sale of Protected Person's Property" 'financial Management of Estate' 'accommodation and Care Needs']
['administrative Law' 'protected Estates'] ['review of Protective Commissioner Decision' "sale of Protected Person's Property" 'financial Management of Estate' 'accommodation and Care Needs']

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 the Protective Commissioner's Decision to Sell Nu's House / Principal Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Protective Commissioner's decision to sell NU's house was the correct and preferable decision." "Whether NU's current and future accommodation needs, other care needs, financial circumstances, and her views and family members' views justified sale of the property."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal affirmed the sale decision because the evidence from professionals showed NU could not live independently and would require nursing home or supported accommodation for the foreseeable future, she required more intensive support and attendant care, and her existing income was insufficient to fund those services or sustain her position long term. Sale of the house was found to be the only way to fund the services NU needed, despite NU's express wishes and distress about the sale.

Court Disposition

The decision of the Protective Commissioner to sell NU's property was affirmed.

Orders

  • ["The decision of the Protective Commissioner to sell NU's property is affirmed."]