KKD [2019] NSWCATGD 4

KKD [2019] NSWCATGD 4

KKD's intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder restrict him in at least one major life activity to such an extent that he requires supervision, making him a person in need of a guardian. The restrictions on kitchen access and locked doors and gates were environmental restraints, and routine Quetiapine use to influence behaviour was chemical restraint, each requiring informed consent. It was in KKD's interests to make a limited guardianship order authorising decisions about those restrictive practices, and TMW met the statutory requirements to be appointed as private guardian for a 12-month reviewable order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Guardianship Application / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Guardianship order made for KKD; TMW appointed as guardian for one year with limited functions concerning restrictive practices.
Legal Topics
['guardianship Order' 'private Guardian' 'restrictive Practices' 'ndis' 'chemical Restraint' 'environmental Restraint']
['guardianship' 'disability Law'] ['guardianship Order' 'private Guardian' 'restrictive Practices' 'ndis' 'chemical Restraint' 'environmental Restraint']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Guardianship Application / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether KKD was a person in need of a guardian because of disability preventing him from making important life decisions.' "Whether a guardianship order should be made to authorise decisions about restrictive practices in KKD's behaviour support plan." 'Whether restricted kitchen access, locked external doors and gates, and routine psychotropic medication were restrictive practices requiring informed consent.' "Whether TMW should be appointed as KKD's private guardian." 'How long the guardianship order should last.']

Ratio Decidendi

KKD's intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder restrict him in at least one major life activity to such an extent that he requires supervision, making him a person in need of a guardian. The restrictions on kitchen access and locked doors and gates were environmental restraints, and routine Quetiapine use to influence behaviour was chemical restraint, each requiring informed consent. It was in KKD's interests to make a limited guardianship order authorising decisions about those restrictive practices, and TMW met the statutory requirements to be appointed as private guardian for a 12-month reviewable order.

Court Disposition

Guardianship order made for KKD; TMW appointed as guardian for one year with limited functions concerning restrictive practices.

Orders

  • ['A guardianship order is made for KKD.' 'TMW of [Appendix removed from publication.] is appointed as the guardian.' 'This is a continuing guardianship order for a period of one year from 21 January 2019.' 'This is a limited guardianship order giving the guardian(s) custody of KKD to the extent necessary to carry...