[2018] VCAT 1588
General information, not legal advice.
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal
2018-11-19
Original judgment source is linked above.
[1] See report of Praveen Thottappilil dated 1 September 2014, Dr Mahima Adhikary dated 25 November 2014, and Dr Soama Shaliby dated 11 December 2014 provided to the Tribunal for the hearing on 13 April 2017 and 28 April 2017.
[2] "Medical Treatment" is defined in section 3 of the Medical Treatment Planning and Decisions Act 2016.
[3] Section 22(2) The Tribunal must consider: (AB) the wishes of the proposed represented person so far as they can be ascertained.
[4] NEXTT is the organisation that provides most of the personnel that carry out support services to THD in his residence. NEXTT is not under the control in any way of the guardian.
[5] At the hearing THD indicated that he might like two weekly contact with his parents whereas in meeting with VLA prior to the hearing he was talking four weekly visits as was the practice prior to the August hearing, subject to his wishes on each occasion still.
[6] As discussed at the hearing the relationship of THD with NEXTT as a service provider is not a matter within the Tribunal's jurisdiction at this time.
[8] Section 30 of the Act: Guardian may (Tribunal emphasis) apply for the advice of the Tribunal upon any matter relating to the scope of the Guardianship order or exercise of power.
[9] Section 4(2)(a) The requirement that the Tribunal act in a way that "is the least restrictive of a (THD's counsel's emphasis) person's freedom---".