ZDH v ZDI [2017] NSWCATAP 94

ZDH v ZDI [2017] NSWCATAP 94

No question of law was raised and no ground established warranting leave to appeal; the Tribunal's decision reflected due regard to ZDJ’s wishes and the legal requirements, and its findings and approach did not reveal error or injustice justifying appellate intervention.

Parties
Appellant: ZDH; First Respondent: ZDI; Second Respondent: ZDJ; Third Respondent: ZDK; Fourth Respondent: NSW Trustee and Guardian; Fifth Respondent: ZDL
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Panel Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; ZDL joined as additional respondent.
Legal Topics
Financial Management Orders, Enduring Power of Attorney, Appeals Leave to Appeal, Protected Person’s Wishes
Guardianship Law Tribunal Practice Financial Management Orders Enduring Power of Attorney Appeals Leave to Appeal Protected Person’s Wishes

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ZDH

Appellant

ZDI

First Respondent

ZDJ

Second Respondent

ZDK

Third Respondent

NSW Trustee and Guardian

Fourth Respondent

ZDL

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Panel Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal failed to give appropriate weight to the wishes of ZDJ as reflected in the enduring power of attorney
  2. 2 Whether there was an error of law in the appointment of a financial manager
  3. 3 Whether leave to appeal should be granted in absence of an error of law

Ratio Decidendi

No question of law was raised and no ground established warranting leave to appeal; the Tribunal's decision reflected due regard to ZDJ’s wishes and the legal requirements, and its findings and approach did not reveal error or injustice justifying appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; ZDL joined as additional respondent.

Orders

  • ZDL is joined to the appeal as an additional respondent.
  • Appeal dismissed.