FH [2020] QCAT 482

Date: 7 December 2020
Tribunal: Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Tribunal Member: Member Traves
HRA Sections: s 9(4)
Rights Considered: N/A
Other Legislation: Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), ss 12, 129, Schedule 2
Keywords: Health, Mental Health, Guardianship

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.

This case concerned an application made by Direct Care Resources for the appointment of the Public Guardian to make decisions with respect to legal matters for FH. An employee of Direct Care Resources sustained an injury after slipping whilst providing care services to FH at FH’s home, and subsequently filed a claim under the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld). Evidence was provided by FH’s general practitioner that he did not possess the capacity to make decisions with respect to complicated legal matters. The Public Trustee had already been appointed as administrator of FH’s financial and property matters, but Member Traves found that this matter was not within the mandate of the Public Trustee. This was because it concerned FH’s liability under the Personal Injuries Proceedings Act 2002 (Qld), rather than being a legal matter with respect to FH’s property or finances.

Member Traves held that there would ‘be an immediate risk of harm to FH’ if the appointment of the Public Guardian was not made and made an order to that effect: at [13]. In making that order, Member Traves recognised the Tribunal as being ‘subject to the HRA [Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld)] when it makes a decision to appoint an administrator or guardian under the Act, being, in the course of making that decision, a “public entity” acting in an “administrative capacity”’: at [13]. Member Traves did not specify what sections of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) were considered in her decision.

Visit the judgement: FH [2020] QCAT 482