Guardianship and Administration Act 1995; ss, 3, 5, 8, 11, 51, 67, 68.

The decision has been anonymised for the purpose of publication.

1. KKD is a 33 year old man who is currently residing in Victoria.
2. KKD has been subject to an administration order appointing the Public Trustee (Tas) as his administrator since 27 August 2010. The order was reviewed in August 2013, August 2016, August 2019, and again in August 2022 when it was continued to 16 August 2025.
3. On 7 July 2025, the Public Trustee emailed the Tribunal indicating that consideration was being given to allowing the administration order to lapse on its expiry on 16 August 2025.
4. To determine whether an administration order was still needed the Tribunal, on its own motion, conducted a review of the administration order.
5. The application was listed for hearing in Hobart on 11 August 2025.

1. The hearing was attended in person by Ian Strutton from the Public Trustee and KKD attended by telephone.
2. After hearing evidence and submissions, we revoked the administration order.
3. KKD has requested written reasons. These are the reasons.

1. The power of the Tribunal to review an administration order is derived in s 67 of Guardianship and Administration Act 1995 (the Act), while s 68 outlines actions the Tribunal may take after undertaking a review which include varying, continuing or revoking an order.
2. Section 51 of the Act set out the criteria which must be met before the Tribunal can continue or vary an administration order. These require the Tribunal to be satisfied that the person:

(i) has impaired decision-making ability in respect of decisions relating to financial matters; and

(ii) is in need of an administrator; and

(iii) the Tribunal is satisfied that the order will promote the person's personal and social well-being.

1. Financial matters is defined in s 3 of the Act as:

financial matter, in relation to a person, means any matter relating to the estate of the person including the income, assets, debts, liabilities, real property, personal property and financial affairs of the person, and includes any legal matter that relates to the property or finances of the person;

2. Decision-making ability is defined in s 11 of the Act. Section 11(2) of the Act sets out when an adult has impaired decision-making ability in respect of decisions.

11. Decision-making ability > > ...

(2) For the purposes of this Act, an adult has impaired decision-making ability in respect of a decision if the adult is unable, even with the provision of access to practicable and appropriate support, to -

(a) understand information relevant to the decision; or

(b) retain information relevant to the decision for a sufficient time to make and consistently communicate the decision; or

(c) use or weigh information relevant to the decision; or

(d) communicate the decision (whether by speech, gesture or other means).

1. When determining the element of need, the Tribunal must consider: the wishes and preferences of the person; whether need can be met by other means less restrictive of the person's freedom of decision and action; and the wishes and preferences of any close family members, carers and other significant person.
2. Section 5 of the Act sets out the ways a 'person's personal and social well-being' can be promoted.
3. When making its decision, the Tribunal must observe the principles contained in s 8 of the Act.

1. The Tribunal did not have a report from a health practitioner but had a June 2022 report from Dr TK stating KKD had an intellectual disability and Cluster B personality disorder which impact his ability to manage day to day and more complex financial matters.
2. At the outset of the hearing Mr Strutton indicated he was seeking a revocation of the administration order based on there being no need for an order.
3. Mr Strutton stated KKD left Tasmania in 2020 and is currently incarcerated at [a prison] in Victoria. KKD is sentenced to imprisonment until 15 June 2033 and is eligible for parole from 15 June 2029.
4. Mr Strutton advised KKD has no property or assets in Tasmania and has no money invested with the Public Trustee in Tasmania. Mr Strutton indicated KKD has a bank account with Westpac which KKD has always managed himself, and which Public Trustee have no access to.
5. Mr Strutton indicated there were two matters that had been outstanding but dealt with subsequent to the filing of the annual report. The first was a small cash inheritance of just under $1000.00 received from an estate of a grandparent, in July 2025. The second matter was KKD has outstanding fines payable to Monetary Penalties Enforcement Service (MPES) that had accrued over the last 20 years, totalling approximately $4400.00. Mr Strutton stated the money received from the inheritance was applied to the payment of some of KKD's fines, together with the remaining small sum held by the Public Trustee. A sum of $2400.00 has been paid to MPES as partial settlement of the debt of $4400. Ms Strutton confirmed that after this payment, the Public Trustee account held is at nil balance.
6. Mr Strutton confirmed that KKD still has the reminder of the debt to pay to MPES, though Public Trustee had provided details to MPES as to KKD's current circumstances and requested the remaining sum be written off.
7. Mr Strutton submitted that given that KKD has no assets or property in Tasmania and is incarcerated in Victoria and has no current plans to return to Tasmania, no need exists for an administration order.
8. Based on the evidence we are satisfied that the only remaining financial matter KKD has in Tasmania is his debt to MPES, which he has no current means to pay. We find there is no need for an administration order.

1. The administration order for KKD made on 17 August 2022 has been reviewed and is revoked.