Health, Mental Health and Guardianship

The Tribunal heard an application for the Public Guardian to be appointed as guardian for DKM.

This case arose from an application for the Public Guardian to be appointed as guardian for DKM. During proceedings, the Tribunal initiated an application for a confidentiality order concerning a photograph of DKM.

This case concerned an application for a stay of the operation of orders made by the Tribunal in relation to guardianship proceedings arising from a dispute between DAMA and DEA, the attorneys for DA. The Tribunal recognised that section 25 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) provides for the right not to have a person’s privacy unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with, but noted that human rights may be subject to reasonable limitation.

This case concerned a review of the appointment of the Public Guardian and the Public Trustee as guardian and administrator respectively for CC in circumstances where his sister had nominated herself for those roles. In making an order that the Public Guardian and the Public Trustee continue in their roles for the next five years, Member Allen held that this was a reasonable limitation on CC’s human rights and there were no less restrictive means available.

This particular hearing concerned an application for an interim order seeking the appointment of the Public Guardian and Public Trustee of Queensland to manage HH’s personal and financial decisions, respectively. In its reasons, the Tribunal recognised that it was subject to the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld). The Tribunal noted that such an appointment on an interim basis without a fair hearing is a serious incursion on a person’s human rights.

This case concerned an application for an interim order that the Public Trustee be appointed for all financial matters for JF. Member Traves recognised that the Tribunal was a public entity acting in an administrative capacity within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) and recognised the making of an interim order for guardianship was ‘a serious incursion on a person’s human rights’.

This case concerned an application for a confidentiality order, protecting personal information that the Tribunal held pertaining to HFI. In making this confidentiality order, Member Goodman recognised that any infringement of HFI’s rights under the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) were reasonably justified in order to prevent serious harm to HFI.

This case concerned an application for the appointment of the Public Guardian to make decisions regarding legal matters for FH. Member Traves recognised that the Tribunal was a public entity acting in an administrative capacity within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) and was required to consider the Act when making such an order.

The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal reviewed guardianship appointments for MJP, a young man who is unable to communicate decisions about his life.

The Tribunal considered the appointment of a suitable guardian and administrator for a woman experiencing impaired decision making as a result of  dementia.