A function or power conferred, or duty imposed, by this Act is to be performed so that -

a) The means which is the least restrictive of a person's freedom of decision and action as is possible in the circumstances adopted;

b) The best interests of the person are promoted; and

c) The wishes, directions, preferences and values of the person are, if possible, carried into effect.

1. On a review of an order appointing an administrator, the Tribunal must consider if the legislative requirements for making the appointment can still be met. In order to appoint an administrator, the Tribunal must always balance the principles in s 6 of the Act, and needs to be satisfied, in accordance with s 51 of the Act, that the represented person:

a) Is a person with a disability; > > b) Is unable by reason of the disability to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matters relating to all or part of his or her estate; and > > c) Is in need of an administrator of his or her estate.

2. The Guardianship and Administration Regulations 2017 (the Regulations), that is the version current from 21 November 2022 to 31 August 2024, set out the requirement for applications to be supported by a report from a health care professional. Regulation 4 provides:

(1) An application made under the Act in respect of a person, other than an application under section 44, is to be supported by a report from a health care professional - > > (a) detailing the disability of the person in respect of whom the application is made; and > > (b) made in accordance with subregulation (2) . > > (2) The report referred to in subregulation (1) is to state the opinion of the health care professional as to whether the disability affects the ability of the person concerned to make reasonable judgements in respect of one or more of the following: > > (a) his or her person; > > (b) his or her circumstances; > > (c) his or her financial affairs. > > (3) If a report is not provided in accordance with subregulation (1) , a statement must be supplied detailing the reasons why the report cannot be provided.

3. Regulation 4(3) sets out that if a health care professional report (HCPR) is not provided with an application, a statement must be supplied detailing the reasons why.
4. The Public Trustee filed with the application a statement dated 8 July 2024 detailing why a HCPR could not be obtained. This statement demonstrates that despite the repeated efforts of the Public Trustee, a HCPR could not be obtained because TWC would not attend for a consultation with her general practitioner.
5. The Tribunal registry accepted the application on the basis of the regulation 4(3) statement and the matter was listed for hearing. No HCPR was received prior to the hearing.
6. At the hearing the Public Trustee detailed the efforts made to obtain a HCPR. On 29 May and 12 June 2024, the Public Trustee had written to TWC's general practitioner requesting a medical report however such report was not received nor was any response to the request. On 17 June 2024 the medical practice of TWC's general practitioner advised they needed TWC to attend for a consultation with her general practitioner in order to complete the HCPR. That same day the Public Trustee made a request to TWC that she attend for the consultation with her general practitioner. TWC still had not attended for a consultation to enable the HCPR to be completed at the time the application was filed with the Tribunal. At the time of hearing a HCPR was still not available due to TWC's failure to attend a medical appointment to enable such report to be completed.
7. Ms Saward from the Public Trustee confirmed the previous client account manager Ms Cheney had arranged for the medical practice to contact TWC to arrange the appointment noting that TWC will not answer phone calls from the Public Trustee. The medical practice had also not been able to contact TWC to arrange the appointment. The last engagement by TWC with the Public Trustee other than by email was in June 2024 when TWC's daughter was in the Launceston General Hospital and TWC required funding for emergency accommodation.
8. Ms Saward gave further evidence that TWC engages with the Public Trustee through email which involves her sending between 6 and 10 emails each day. Ms Saward advised there are approximately 400 emails on the Public Trustee's file. TWC will not however attend face to face appointments or take telephone calls from the Public Trustee. Several in person meetings have been arranged but TWC does not attend. The Public Trustee has made significant attempts to have TWC engage with her client account manager, on one occasion the client account manager travelled a significant distance to the regional town in which TWC resides to meet TWC in a café however she did not attend the meeting.
9. Ms Saward's evidence was she estimated there were "close to 10" emails sent to TWC in an attempt to arrange for her to attend a doctor to obtain a HCPR to which TWC had not responded. Ms Saward advised us, "she never comments about going to the doctor, so she never replies to those emails." Ms Saward confirmed that since taking over as TWC's client account manager late in 2024 she had communicated with TWC 4 or 5 times in relation to attending the doctor and obtaining a HCPR advising TWC does not want an administration order and "she thinks she should be able to do what she likes with her money and that we shouldn't be declining her requests."
10. In a previous decision by the Tribunal in CL (Application for Administration) [2023] TASCAT 115, the Tribunal determined that an application for administration, which did not have a supporting HCPR, was valid as it had a statement as required by regulation 4(3) of the Regulations. Although a HCPR was not filed with the application before us, we did have a statement as required by regulation 4(3) of the Regulations and we therefore determined that the application was valid.
11. TWC's disability and capacity to make reasonable judgements about her estate
12. The hearing papers contain 11 medical reports including 2 previous HCPRs, with 4 of those reports explicitly stating TWC's disability is permanent and static. The report of James Drury and two HCPRs of Dr Emma-Jane McCrum also refer to TWC needing help to manage her finances. Each of the 11 medical reports confirmed TWC lived with a disability.
13. The most recent of those reports is the HCPR of Dr McCrum dated 20 April 2021, which details that TWC has an acquired brain injury arising from a motor vehicle accident in June 2007 and that the disability is static. Dr McCrum also refers to the intellectual disability as being static. Dr McCrum further reports that TWC's disability impacts on her capacity to manage her day to day financial matters, complex financial and legal decisions and legal matters.
14. Dr McCrum completed an earlier HCPR dated 2 March 2019 which records TWC's acquired brain injury as static, and states "[TWC's] behavioural and emotional dysregulation arising from head injury are permanent." In the same report she also provided:

TWC's ability to use her reasoning skills is significantly impacted by her behavioural dysregulation and memory impairment. This means she will not be able to understand the complexity of the financial matters and may not be able to respond in a timely or consistent manner.

15. In response to a question about TWC's capacity to make major financial or legal decisions Dr McCrum states:

[TWC's] difficulties would make these decisions extremely difficult for her as she would be unable to concentrate on the information, regulate stress during the decision making process and therefore likely to make an impulsive decision. However, she would be able to follow summaries of the information and be able to impart her views in the decisions based on these summaries.

16. The Clinical Neuropsychological Report of Dr Emma-Jane McCrum dated 2 March 2019, opined "[g]iven her [TWC's] age, diagnoses and previous interventions and supports, these deficits are permanent and life-long." Further "it is my opinion that TWC has sustained significant and permanent cognitive loss from the frontal lobe damage sustained in the motor vehicle accident...it is highly probable given her age and time since injury these deficits are permanent."
17. In Dr Philip Reid's report dated 17 July 2014, he states in relation to TWC:

Her presentation is consistent with a brain injury involving the frontal lobe. As well as cognitive dysfunction as outlined in neuropsychological testing, behavioural symptoms of poor impulse, aggression, poor planning and a lack of empathy are consistent with this injury. > > ... > > Her difficulties have been longstanding and persistent. They have plateaued and are likely to be ongoing. As such her prognosis is poor for significant recovery from here.

18. The report of James Drury (clinical neuropsychologist) dated 8 April 2014, refers to TWC's condition as static, stating, "her condition is such that she is likely to require support for the foreseeable future." He also advises, "if she is to obtain a compensation payment, I am of the view that she would require an Administrator to manage this on her behalf and provide her with a suitable weekly allowance." Dr Drury reports that TWC's cognitive functioning will not improve, and that her cognitive and behavioural functioning is permanent.
19. In Dr Matthew Summer's report dated 4 February 2008, he has written:

[TWC]'s memory has been affected as a consequence of a primary deficit to executive functions. [TWC] has sustained a primary deficit to her capacity to organise complex information as she receives it, this results in a secondary deficit to be learning and recall of new complex information. > > ... > > [T]he lowered verbal comprehension capacity that she displays indicates that she will struggle to comprehend complex instructions. Further, the mild lowering to working memory capacity indicates that she may struggle with retaining multiple step instructions to a level sufficient to enable comprehension. > > ... > > [TWC] demonstrated a mild to moderate deficit to planning and organisation of information. In contrast she demonstrated intact information processing speed, intact mental flexibility, intact impulse control intact attention and concentration. The planning and organisational deficit demonstrated indicates that [TWC] will struggle to make reasonable plans which she is able to follow through.

20. In clinical neuropsychologist Professor Vicki Anderson's report of July 2012 she states:

It is now 5 years post-injury and recovery would be expected to be complete. > > ...At 5 years post-injury these difficulties are likely to represent residual problems.

21. As established by the HCPRs and the health and medical reports referred to at [22]-[30], TWC lives with an intellectual disability and an acquired brain injury sustained as a result of her being struck by a motor vehicle in 2007. Although the most recent HCPR we have before us was completed in April 2021, there is evidence from Dr Emma-Jane McCrum's Clinical Neuropsychological Report from March 2019, a medical report from clinical neuropsychologist James Drury from April 2014 and the neuropsychological report from Professor Vicki Anderson in July 2012, that TWC's disability is permanent, ongoing and unchanged.
22. Ms Saward did not take issue with the medical evidence before us and confirmed the evidence was consistent with records of and her observations of previous client account managers dealings with TWC and her engagement with TWC by email.
23. We were advised by Ms Saward that TWC does not want an administrator however TWC did not attend the hearing, nor did she proffer any alternative medical evidence to demonstrate she did not live with a disability, and/or was capable of making reasonable judgements about her estate.
24. Based on the consistent and uncontradicted medical evidence which provides a longitudinal history dating back to 4 February 2008, we are satisfied that TWC has a disability and is unable by reason of that disability to make reasonable judgements in relation her estate.

1. TWC owns her own home without encumbrance, and lives in that property with one of her children. There are periodic outgoings for that property that need to be paid in a timely manner. These payments include rates, TasWater, insurance, and maintenance costs. Some of these outgoings are paid from the funds held and managed by the Public Trustee for TWC. To maintain accommodation for TWC and her child it is important her accommodation financial needs are met and this can only occur through an administrator ensuring the out goings are paid and utilities kept up to date. Payment of these costs by an administrator ensures TWC has stable accommodation.
2. In addition to the income and capital distributions from the MAIB funds which are held with the Public Trustee TWC is in receipt of a disability pension from Services Australia. The disability pension is paid to her each fortnight and in addition she receives distributions of $450 per week from the funds held with the Public Trustee.
3. TWC is unable to meet her personal expenses from these funds and contacts the Public Trustee as detailed in Ms Saward's evidence between 6 to 10 times per day seeking additional funds. In support of her requests for additional funds TWC advises the Public Trustee she has expended her money advising that she has run out of nappies, food and baby formula. Ms Saward gave evidence that if TWC does not receive an immediate response to her initial email she escalates with threats to kill herself or self-harm if she is not provided with the requested funds. Ms Saward further reported there are concerns about expenditure by TWC on illicit drugs and gambling which results in the funds received by her being insufficient to meet her financial needs. Ms Saward raised additional concerns that Services Australia may not be aware of the MAIB payment received by TWC and therefore there may be funds owing to Services Australia for the preclusion period. Ms Saward estimated at the date of the hearing those funds could be as much as one hundred thousand dollars.
4. Attempts to discuss financial plans or recommendations with TWC have been futile because TWC will not attend requested meetings noting that TWC requested a financial plan be prepared so she could manage her own finances.

Consideration of the s 6 principles

1. TWC has advised the Public Trustee she does not want to be on an administration order. Ms Saward gave evidence that TWC "thinks she should be able to do what she likes with her money and that we shouldn't be declining her requests."
2. Although TWC is opposed to being on an administration order, the conditions of the administration order are the least restrictive of TWC's freedom of decision and action, while promoting her best interests. As Dr McCrum has detailed in her HCPR dated 2 March 2019, "[TWC] herself is also fearful she will make impulsive decisions financially which would not be in her best interests." In that same report Dr McCrum continues, "[TWC] would be at high risk of making very impulsive decisions on a daily basis." She states:

[TWC] reported she struggles to recall bill payments, regularly runs out of money and has to shop daily. Her mother further reported these difficulties.

3. Dr McCrum advises the consequence of appointing or not appointing an administrator might be:

[TWC] will be vulnerable to making impulsive decisions in regards to finances and legal documents. This means she will be at risk of not receiving the full benefit available to her through MAIB and what benefit she does receive not lasting her adult life.

1. We are satisfied on the undisputed medical evidence that TWC is a person with a disability and that by reason of that disability she is unable to make reasonable judgments in respect of matters relating to her estate. As a result of the permanent disability with which TWC lives, as confirmed in the HCPR and medical reports referred to in [22]-[30], TWC's disability impacts her ability to make reasonable judgements in respect of her financial affairs including her estate.
2. We are further satisfied TWC needs an administrator. The evidence establishes there are significant funds held with the Public Trustee which need to be managed to provide additional periodic support to enable TWC to meet her financial needs. The evidence is clear that TWC does not have the capacity to manage these funds, or the periodic and non-periodic expenses relating to her home. These also need to be managed to ensure TWC and her child have secure and stable accommodation, which will be put at risk without an order because the evidence establishes TWC would not be able to manage the expenses and out goings relating to her home. There is a need for an administrator to ensure that TWC's funds held with the Public Trustee are properly managed. For the reasons outlined at [37] there is also a need for engagement with Services Australia.

1. The Public Trustee were seeking reappointment as administrator, and there were no alternate administrators identified. When there is no eligible person to be appointed administrator s 54 of the Act mandates we appoint the Public Trustee.

1. We determined to vary the administration order to appoint the Public Trustee as TWC's Centrelink nominee, and to manage the funds held with the Public Trustee. The appointment is for a period of three (3) years.