YJO v YJP [2025] NSWCATAP 7

YJO v YJP [2025] NSWCATAP 7

Although the Tribunal misstated the statutory task in part, it applied the correct test by considering whether the Mother was able to exercise the access function consistent with statutory principles and found she was not. The error was not material to the outcome. No other ground of appeal or basis for leave to appeal was established. There was no error of law or sufficient basis for leave to appeal; accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: YJO; First Respondent: YJP; Second Respondent: NSW Public Guardian; Separate Representative (respondent): B Fogarty
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Guardianship Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Determination
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Functions of Guardian, Appointment of Public Guardian, Section 17(1)(c) Guardianship Act, Procedural Fairness, Apprehended Bias, Principles for Leave to Appeal
Guardianship Administrative Law Functions of Guardian Appointment of Public Guardian Section 17(1)(c) Guardianship Act Procedural Fairness Apprehended Bias Principles for Leave to Appeal

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 27 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

YJO

Appellant

YJP

First Respondent

NSW Public Guardian

Second Respondent

B Fogarty

Separate Representative (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Guardianship Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal misapplied ss 15(3) and 17(1)(c) of the Guardianship Act in appointing the Public Guardian with an access function
  2. 2 Whether there was any evidence to support a finding that the Mother and Son did not have a close relationship
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal failed to have regard to the Son's views as required by the Guardianship Act

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Tribunal misstated the statutory task in part, it applied the correct test by considering whether the Mother was able to exercise the access function consistent with statutory principles and found she was not. The error was not material to the outcome. No other ground of appeal or basis for leave to appeal was established. There was no error of law or sufficient basis for leave to appeal; accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is refused.
  • Appeal is dismissed.