ZG [2025] QCAT 399 | Case summary

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal|2025-10-20

HEALTH LAW - GUARDIANSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF PROPERTY OF PERSONS WITH IMPAIRED CAPACITY - GUARDIANSHIP AND SIMILAR APPOINTMENTS - where an adult resides in an aged care facility - where an adult appointed their daughter as Enduring Power of Attorney for personal, health and financial matters - whether there is a need for a substituted decision-maker - where the views and wishes of the adult are considered - whether the attorney is complying with the provisions of the Powers of Attorney Act 1998 (Qld) - where there are concerns about the suitability of attorney and proposed appointees - whether an Enduring Power of Attorney should be revoked - whether the attorney should be removed - whether there is a need for the appointment of a substituted decision maker - where the requirements under s 12 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) have been met - where an Enduring Power of Attorney is overtaken for specific matters - where an interim order is sought to appoint an administrator

Lambourne and Ors v Marrable and Ors [2023] QSC 219

DT - daughter and Enduring Power of Attorney of the adult

[1] ZG is 70 years of age and of Italian heritage. He moved to the Gold Coast from Victoria approximately 19 years ago and has managed his own business interests. ZG is divorced. He has a daughter, grandson and a son who reside in the Gold Coast area. Members of his family of origin and their respective families reside in Victoria.
[2] On 3 August 2023, ZG appointed his daughter, DT, as his Enduring Power of Attorney for financial matters and as his enduring guardian under New South Wales legislation.[1] DT signed the respective acceptances on the same day. Clause 4 of the appointment of the Enduring Power of Attorney (financial matters) states that the attorney's powers will commence when a medical practitioner considers that the principal is unable to manage his affairs and provides a document to that effect.
[3] ZG has a permanent tenure within a residential aged care facility on the Gold Coast, having entered aged care in November 2023.
[4] On 19 September 2024, the Tribunal received applications from SS, a sister of the adult, seeking the appointment of a guardian and administrator for the adult.
[5] On 4 February 2025, the Tribunal received a further application from SS for an order about an Enduring Power of Attorney.
[6] An application for leave to be represented was filed by DD, the adult's attorney, on 12 August 2025, to which SS filed written objections.
[7] The Tribunal issued directions on 26 August 2025 which included that the Tribunal's registry must request from the witness to the appointment of the enduring guardian and Enduring Power of Attorney a statement addressing why he was satisfied in the matters relating to understanding and voluntariness referred to in the certificates in those documents. DD was directed to provide a response to the Tribunal to the objections raised by SS.
[8] The application by the adult's attorney for leave to be represented was determined on the papers in a decision of the Tribunal on 10 September 2025. The Tribunal refused the application for the attorney to be granted leave to be represented and appointed ADA law, under section 125 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld) ('GAA') to represent the views, wishes and interests of the adult.
[9] The applications for the appointment of a guardian, administrator and for an order about an Enduring Power of Attorney were heard on 18 September 2025 at Southport Courthouse. The decisions were reserved.
[10] On 24 September 2025 the Tribunal received applications from ZG, through his legal representative, for the interim appointment of the Public Trustee of Queensland as administrator and for directions prohibiting the attorney from selling the adult's real property in Victoria. The adult was seeking for the Tribunal to determine these applications prior to making final decisions in relation to the applications from his sister.
[11] A second hearing took place on 3 October 2025 (in Brisbane via videoconference) to consider the new applications and submissions.

[12] The Tribunal is required to determine capacity as at the date of hearing in accordance with section 12 of the GAA as the Tribunal must be satisfied that the adult has impaired capacity before it can further consider the applications for the appointment of a guardian and administrator for the adult.
[13] The adult is presumed to have capacity in accordance with General Principle 1 of the GAA.[2]
[14] The GAA defines capacity as follows:[3]

Capacity, for a person for a matter, means the person is capable of -

(a) understanding the nature and effect of decisions about a matter; and

(b) freely and voluntarily making decisions about the matter; and

(c) communicating the decisions in some way.

[15] In the determination of capacity for an adult for a matter, the Tribunal must consider the type of decisions to be made and the support available to the adult from the adult's existing support network.[4]
[16] The Tribunal is to consider the medical evidence and submissions from the parties to determine if the presumption of capacity is to be rebutted for the adult.
[17] The Tribunal, when considering the appointment of a guardian or administrator, must be satisfied not only in regard to capacity, but also of the other matters set out in section 12 of the GAA.
[18] The Tribunal is required to act in accordance with sections 14 and 15 of the GAA when appointing guardians and administrators. The appointee must satisfy the requirements of section 14 including that the person is appropriate for appointment in accordance with the appropriateness considerations set out in section 15 of the GAA.
[19] By operation of section 34 of the Powers of Attorney Act 1998 (Qld) ('POAA'), the Enduring Power of Attorney appointing an attorney under New South Wales law is to be recognised in Queensland and is to be treated as if it had been made in compliance with the POAA.
[20] Under section 41 of the POAA, a principal has capacity to make an Enduring Power of Attorney only if the principal is capable of making the Enduring Power of Attorney freely and voluntarily and understands the nature and effect of the Enduring Power of Attorney. Under the general principles, an adult is presumed to have capacity.[5]
[21] The Tribunal has the same jurisdiction as the Supreme Court of Queensland in respect of Enduring Powers of Attorney in accordance with section 109A of the POAA. The Tribunal is to consider the capability of an attorney to carry out their duties in such a way as to protect the adult's interests and otherwise act in accordance with the POAA. The Tribunal may make an order removing an attorney or changing or revoking a document in accordance with section 116 of the POAA. Under section 22(2) of the GAA, an attorney's power may be subject to Tribunal authorisation, where an attorney may exercise power only to the extent authorised by the Tribunal.
[22] The Tribunal must give consideration to the relevant human rights as set out in the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) ('HRA'). As required by section 48 of the HRA, the Tribunal must interpret statutory provisions to the extent possible that is consistent with their purpose in a way that is compatible with human rights.

Does ZG have capacity to make personal and financial decisions and to make a new Enduring Power of Attorney?

[23] In a letter dated 18 September 2023 by a doctor on behalf of a general medicine consultant at the Tweed Valley Hospital, ZG was deemed as no longer having capacity to comprehend complex matters such as finances, official documentation, health care and lifestyle decisions. The adult's daughter was recognised as his legal decision maker to effect the placement of the adult in a residential aged care facility.
[24] Additional written evidence includes a letter dated 29 September 2023 by a renal physician at John Flynn Private Hospital who provided the opinion that the adult does not have capacity to make lifestyle, healthcare or financial decisions. The physician advocated that the adult's Enduring Power of Attorney be enacted for the above matters.
[25] In a letter dated 26 August 2024 to a general practitioner Dr BB, a consultant physician and geriatrician, stated that the adult attained a score of 19 out of 30 on the Mini Mental State Examination and exhibits features of moderate dementia secondary to Parkinson's disease. He wrote that, given the adult's long-standing history of Parkinson's disease, the adult exhibited features of multi-domain cognitive impairment, which included an executive dysfunction pattern with impaired frontal lobe function. This manifested as vagueness, lack of clarity in thought, poor planning and organisation and an inability to comprehend and express his thoughts in a clear and coherent matter. Dr BB stated that the adult lacks the capacity to make complex decisions and, therefore, should not be involved in introducing new parties to the Enduring Power of Attorney arrangement that has been in place since late 2023.
[26] In a report dated 8 February 2025 Dr DK, a general practitioner, refers to the above-mentioned letter from the consultant physician and geriatrician. Dr DK stated that the adult is prescribed medication to control his behaviour within the residential aged care setting. The general practitioner provided the opinion that, due to the adult's advanced Parkinson's disease, cognitive impairment and dementia, the adult was unable to understand the necessary criteria to make or revoke an Enduring Power of Attorney, and was unable to make decisions in relation to financial matters, restrictive practice matters and complex personal matters (e.g. decisions pertaining to complex health care and lifestyle/accommodation choices).
[27] The adult's residential aged care plan overview dated 8 February 2025, provided to the Tribunal by the attorney on 11 September 2025, includes the following information relevant to the adult's cognitive status:

(a) ZG demonstrates wandering behaviour, sadness/withdrawal and is verbally disruptive;

(b) ZG has short- and long-term memory deficits and can be disoriented to time and place;

(c) It is alleged that the adult physically assaulted another resident on at least two occasions in 2024;

(d) ZG experiences altered perception and delusions along with visual and auditory hallucinations. The adult is subject to the restrictive practice of chemical restraint whereby he is prescribed psychotropic medication to modify behaviours due to his delusions.

[28] At the hearing of 3 October 2025, the clinical care manager of the adult's residential aged care facility submitted that, based on her clinical observations since November 2023, the adult does not have decision making capacity. She added that ZG continues to experience delusions and that his unpredictable behaviours have escalated in recent months.
[29] In oral evidence, ZG told the Tribunal, 'I think my capacity issues are a little bit tainted' and 'I feel I am confident enough to do paperwork in any project I involve myself in'. The adult's legal representative submitted that in her meetings with the adult he has expressed consistent views and wishes.
[30] The adult's daughter, DT, concurred with the medical evidence. She provided an example that, when she and the adult were discussing the location of a residential aged care facility in which he was to be placed, the adult did not demonstrate insight into the consequences of a decision when he expressed the view to travel to Victoria for a couple of weeks and then return to Queensland as he just wanted to 'see people'.
[31] DT submitted that she had utilised the above-mentioned documentation from the medical professionals at Tweed Valley Hospital and John Flynn Private Hospital in order to commence acting as the adult's financial attorney, in accordance with the adult's directions within the financial Enduring Power of Attorney dated 3 August 2023.
[32] The adult's sister, SS, provided the opinion that, when making decisions, the adult 'can still have some say with guidance of course'. She added that 'he may not know what the day is today' and that, in her view, the adult would be able 'to provide more insight' into his care and financial matters if he were 'to be allowed some say' in those matters.
[33] The Tribunal considered the evidence. The longitudinal medical evidence establishes that ZG has moderate dementia secondary to Parkinson's disease. The medical evidence establishes that since September 2023 ZG, as a consequence of cognitive deficits attributable to dementia, has been unable to make complex personal and financial decisions and that his Enduring Power of Attorney should be enacted to facilitate residential aged care placement.
[34] Dr BB, a consultant physician and geriatrician on 26 August 2024 documented the severity of the adult's multi-domain cognitive impairment and opined at that time the adult was unable to make complex decisions, including making a change to his enduring power of attorney.
[35] In more recent medical evidence within the report dated 8 February 2025 of Dr DT, the adult is described as no longer able to make decisions in relation to financial and restrictive practice matters, whilst able to make simple, not complex, decisions in relation to personal matters such as health care and lifestyle/accommodation matters.
[36] Within the adult's care plan formulated by the residential aged care facility, the adult is described as experiencing delusions and hallucinations which have, on occasions, adversely impacted his behaviour towards others. The document includes that the adult is prescribed medication within the aged care facility for the primary purpose of controlling his behaviour. Such practice is consistent with chemical restraint which, within the aged care setting, is determined to be a personal matter.[6]

[37] Upon consideration of the evidence the Tribunal is not satisfied that ZG understands the nature and effect of decisions in relation to financial matters, restrictive practice matters and complex health care and lifestyle/accommodation matters, due to cognitive deficits attributable to dementia associated with Parkinson's disease. Furthermore, the medical evidence establishes that, due to his cognitive deficits, ZG is unable to understand the relevant criteria necessary to make or revoke an Enduring Power of Attorney.
[38] Accordingly, the Tribunal rebuts the presumption of capacity for ZG for financial matters, restrictive practice matters, complex health care matters and complex lifestyle/accommodation matters. The Tribunal also determines that ZG is unable to understand the necessary criteria relevant to making or revoking an Enduring Power of Attorney.

[39] In her applications and written submissions to the Tribunal, SS sought the following orders: the appointment of an additional Enduring Power of Attorney for 'a more balanced perspective'; the removal of current guardianship and Enduring Power of Attorney; the alteration of the current next of kin; the relocation of the adult to an aged care facility in Melbourne, Victoria; the appointment of an independent enduring Power of Attorney; not the appointment of the Public Guardian; and the appointment of herself as sole Enduring Power of Attorney for the adult.
[40] At the hearings, SS stated that she sought the following outcomes: the removal of DT as the adult's Enduring Power of Attorney and proposed herself as sole appointed decision maker for the adult for personal and financial matters; to be added as an attorney for the adult, to make decisions with DT; and whatever the adult wants.

Did ZG have capacity to make the Enduring Power of Attorney dated 3 August 2023?

[41] SS submitted that, in her view, the adult signed the Enduring Power of Attorney under duress at a time during which he was unresponsive after a fall. In other submissions, the applicant stated that, at the time, the adult believed he was making an informed and reasonable decision in appointing DT as his attorney.
[42] In accordance with the Tribunal's directions of 26 August 2025, the witness to the enduring documents provided a written response to the Tribunal addressing why he was satisfied of the matters relating to understanding and voluntariness referred to in the certificates in the enduring documents. The witness, a lawyer, submitted that he did not recall meeting the adult and no longer has access to any documentation he made in relation to witnessing the documents as he no longer works for the law firm. The witness stated that it was his standard practice, when witnessing enduring documents, to undertake the necessary checks in relation to the principal's capacity, voluntariness and understanding of the effect and scope of the document.
[43] In her written and verbal submissions to the Tribunal, the adult's legal representative stated that the adult had told her that he 'made a mistake' in making the enduring documents and in appointing DT as his attorney in, what he is said to have described as, a 'rushed' process. The representative submitted that the adult's capacity to make an Enduring Power of Attorney was in question, as the adult had made the Enduring Power of Attorney shortly after being discharged from a long-stay hospitalisation. Further submissions were made in relation to whether the adult was given adequate opportunity to receive legal advice alone, and that the statement provided to the Tribunal by the witness did not adequately explain or resolve such issues. The legal representative further submitted that the documents appear to adhere to the relevant approved forms.
[44] In her submissions to the Tribunal DT, the adult's attorney, stated that a geriatric review at Tweed Valley Hospital on 13 July 2023 confirmed the adult had decision making capacity. The adult was then discharged home and the enduring documents were completed on 3 August 2023 and witnessed by an independent solicitor. DT submitted that in late 2023 the adult was hospitalised after sustaining a fall at his home and was discharged from hospital to the residential aged care facility in which he receives care.

Tribunal findings about ZG's capacity to make an Enduring Power of Attorney on 3 August 2023

[45] There is a presumption at law that ZG had capacity at the time he executed that enduring power of attorney. As held in Lambourne and Ors v Marrable and Ors [2023] QSC 219 ('Lambourne'):

[42] ...[that] presumption includes the implicit presumption that the principal was capable of making the enduring power of attorney freely and voluntarily, and that the principal understood the nature and effect of the enduring power of attorney.

[43] This presumption is to be applied by the court but it may be rebutted if 'the contrary is proven.' Such proof need only meet the civil standard but, given the nature of the matter and the consequences of a finding of a lack of capacity, the proof must be to the Briginshaw standard.[7]

[46] The Tribunal was not persuaded by the arguments of the adult's legal representative. The fact that an appropriately qualified witness cannot recall the event, nor access any relevant notes from a law firm for which he no longer works, does not equate to the witness not being satisfied as to matters relating to the understanding and voluntariness of the adult to make the Enduring Power of Attorney.
[47] Furthermore, there is no medical evidence before the Tribunal rebutting the presumption that ZG had capacity to make the Enduring Power of Attorney on 3 August 2023.
[48] Accordingly, the presumption that ZG had capacity on 3 August 2023 to make the Enduring Power of Attorney is not rebutted.

Is the current decision-making process meeting his needs and protecting his interests?

[49] Whilst the orders sought by SS are inconsistent, notably with some outside the jurisdiction of the Tribunal's authority (e.g. altering the 'next of kin' of an adult), SS was able to provide the Tribunal with a number of submissions which described her concerns. They include:

(a) The adult was admitted to hospital after a catastrophic fall at his home without being discovered for several days, from which time his life has taken a downward spiral.

(b) Since ZG has been in aged care his mental and physical health have further deteriorated. The care of the adult is being neglected. ZG would benefit from physiotherapy and hydrotherapy. Participation in clinical trials for individuals experiencing Parkinson's disease could be explored.

(c) DT as the adult's daughter, should be providing more consistent emotional support, frequent visits and open communication.

(d) ZG experiences loneliness, isolation and frustration in the aged care facility and has expressed a desire to return to Victoria where he will have a much larger support network including his sisters, cousins, nephews and nieces.

(e) He has repeatedly requested access to his medical records and financial statements from DT but has not received them.

(f) ZG believes he has made a mistake appointing DT as his Enduring Power of Attorney as he feels his requests to relocate and to have access to information have not been heard. He feels that he has no voice in his future and has asked SS for assistance in changing his Enduring Power of Attorney.

(g) SS had sought to help the adult by requesting information and actions from DT, communicating regularly with the adult (via telephone and quarterly visits from her home in Melbourne) and by seeking advocacy services for the adult. Her relationship with DT has subsequently completely broken down.

(h) The adult may be financially exploited by the attorney who is not providing information about the adult's financial matters to family members upon their request.

[50] SS told the Tribunal that some family members in Melbourne, including another sister of the adult, and a friend of the adult (in the Gold Coast area) are in agreeance with her assertions.
[51] In contradictory evidence during the hearing of 18 September 2025, SS stated that relocating the adult to Melbourne is not her primary concern and that 'getting him better care here is tantamount'. At the hearing of 3 October 2025, SS said that she is 'not fighting to have [the adult] brought to Melbourne'. She said that she would love for the adult to reside in Melbourne as she lives in Melbourne and that such an arrangement would be cheaper for her to fly to Queensland to see him. She submitted that, 'until things can be sorted out, he has to stay in Queensland' and that she 'would like to have a say in his wellbeing'. She told the Tribunal that she did not know much about Parkinson's disease. She said she had asked her own doctor about the condition and had conducted internet searches.
[52] SS maintained that she had been in the adult's life for many years and could 'manage his finances from anywhere'.

Attorney's response to contentions and issues

[53] DT said that SS failed to provide evidence in relation to her allegations of neglect and financial mismanagements and that SS's applications did not provide information in regard to her appropriateness and competence as a proposed formal decision maker for the adult.
[54] DT submitted that she commenced acting as the adult's attorney prior to his placement in residential aged care and that the accommodation decision, informed by the consultation with the adult's hospital treating team which included a social worker, had been made in collaboration with the adult. The residential aged care facility is located close to his long-term community in Coolangatta/Tweed Heads and is near to his family, friends and familiar surroundings. DT submitted that the facility, unlike other facilities on the Gold Coast with whom she had contacted, had been willing to accommodate the adult in a unit that was not specifically for residents experiencing dementia.
[55] DT rejects allegations that the adult is not receiving appropriate medical care, residential support and family involvement and stated that she continues to engage with residential aged care staff in reviews of the adult's care plan which includes behaviour support, mobility considerations, nutrition and falls management.
[56] The attorney stated that ZG receives ongoing medical and allied health supports, which include consultations with a neurologist, a geriatrician, 'eye specialists' and a dentist. Allied health services that have been provided to the adult, as a consequence of her decision making, include 'ripple massage specialising in Parkinson's therapy', occupational therapy, physiotherapy and emotional wellbeing support. ZG receives support from a personal carer who enables him to regularly access the community in accordance with his preferences which include lunches, coffees, haircuts and shopping.
[57] The attorney submitted that she has supported the adult to attend facility activities such as happy hours, concerts, bingo and social games within the residential aged care facility to maintain his engagement and that she has provided him with personalised items including clothing, snacks and entertainment at his request.
[58] The attorney submitted that she has facilitated regular family visits with the adult (with herself and her son attending up to three times per week), maintained open communication with family members and residential aged care staff about the adult's care needs and has actively involved the adult in decision making to the greatest extent possible. DT stated she has consulted with other family members when contemplating decisions.
[59] The management of the adult's hallucinations and delusions has been the subject of meetings between DT and the nursing staff. In response to delusions and hallucinations, the adult has used his phone to call 000 (e.g. expressing concerns about a baby), has called individuals randomly and has called DT fifteen times in one day in recent days.
[60] DT submitted SS appeared in the adult's life about three years ago when his health began to deteriorate. DT said she communicated with SS about his health care, however the conversations with SS 'turned into talking about financial matters'. DT stated that SS asked her to liquidate all of the adult's assets, at a time when finding a suitable residential aged care facility was the priority. Locating a residential aged care facility that would accept the adult was extremely challenging as he had contracted an infection and could not be discharged until his condition had adequately responded to antibiotic therapy.
[61] DT stated that she had received phone calls and 'awful emails' from the son of SS and that, in her view, some of the communications she has observed from SS towards the adult have been upsetting. She has formed the view that SS does not understand the adult's cognitive and functional status given the nature of some of the communications she has observed SS direct toward to the adult. DT said that she ceased engaging with SS due to the nature of SS's communications towards her.
[62] The adult has spent the last nineteen years of his life in Coolangatta. The adult has never resided in Melbourne. He resided in country Victoria before moving to Queensland. DT stated that she had asked family members in Victoria if they would likely see him more often if he were relocated to Melbourne, and that some said 'not necessarily'. DT said that she did not want the adult to be relocated to Melbourne, a location in which he had never resided, where he would only see SS and her family.
[63] DT provided details of the adult's financial matters in her submissions. They are outlined below.
[64] DT stated that when she commenced acting as the adult's financial attorney, she had been tasked with identifying the entirety of his financial matters which included personal and business interests.
[65] DT said that the adult had conducted his own business for many years and that her actions as financial attorney have included finalising his business activities. Such decisions have included deregistering the adult for goods and services tax (GST) and attending to his capital gains taxation obligations in relation to the sale of the business. The attorney submitted that she has engaged an accountant in Tweed Heads to assist her in these matters.
[66] The attorney told the Tribunal that, when she commenced acting as financial attorney for the adult, in circumstances when the adult was hospitalised prior to his placement in the residential care facility, ZG had $10,000 in cash assets, credit card liabilities totalling $225,000 and ongoing financial obligations (e.g. body corporate fees in relation to two properties and storage fees for industrial items associated with his business). DT submitted that the adult was diagnosed with carbapenem resistant enterobacteriaceae (CRE) whilst hospitalised, and required prolonged treatment and care within the hospital whilst being isolated to prevent the infection from spreading to others. DT stated that, during that time, the adult's hospital fees were charged at $950 per day with minimal contributions made by the adult's private health fund. DT stated that the infection delayed the adult's discharge to aged care as residential aged care facilities would not accept the adult until the infection had been adequately treated and managed.
[67] Once in aged care, the adult had been unable to meet his contribution to aged care and the ongoing residential aged care fees accelerated his budget deficit.
[68] The attorney stated that she made the decision to sell the adult's principal place of residence at Tweed Heads in order meet his financial obligations. The property sold for $585,000. The attorney submitted that she had contributed $32,000 of her own funds to make improvements to the adult's property (e.g. carpets, painting, cooktop, rangehood) prior to the sale and had reimbursed herself in relation to her contributions from the proceeds of the sale of the property.
[69] DT said that once the property was sold, she was able to pay all outstanding debts, including the debt to the residential aged care facility which was, at that time, approximately $80,000.
[70] DT told the Tribunal that the adult's current assets include bank deposits of approximately $22,000 and a property in Wangaratta, Victoria valued at between $800,000 and $900,000. The adult's sole income is rental income from the Wangaratta property of approximately $5,030 per month. DT stated that she had ascertained from Centrelink that the adult was ineligible to receive the age pension due to his assets and income. The adult's expenditure includes residential aged care fees at between $6,300 and $6,800 per month, a personal carer to support the adult to access the community (approximately $17,000 annually), health insurance and expenses in relation to medical/pharmaceutical costs, the Wangaratta property and discretionary items. She said she that, in recent months, the Wangaratta property had undergone repairs and maintenance, including roofing at $22,000. DT stated that she has been advised that the Wangaratta property will continue to need repairs and maintenance (e.g. plumbing, drainage) and that she was not convinced that all of the recommended works would be necessary.
[71] DT submitted documentation evidencing that the adult's residential aged care fees were being paid regularly and that no fees were outstanding.
[72] The attorney submitted that, based on financial advice she obtained on behalf of the adult, she has decided to sell the Wangaratta property. She submitted such a decision will be necessary in order to meet the adult's ongoing expenses including residential aged care fees and to pay the refundable accommodation deposit to the residential aged care facility, which was calculated at $450,000.
[73] DT submitted that she has consulted with the adult when contemplating all financial decisions 'even if he is not going to remember'. The attorney stated that she has acted honestly and with reasonable diligence, maintained records, kept her property separate to that of the adult's, has not used any of the adult's funds for her own purposes and has not engaged in conflict transactions. She stated that she has not yet had an opportunity to collate all of the adult's financial documentation, including receipts, and that she seeks to continue to act as the adult's personal and financial attorney.
[74] DT submitted that her actions as personal and financial attorney, and her intention to continue to act, have been supported by the adult's son, grandson and a sister of the adult.

Submissions by residential care manager and clinical care manager of the residential aged care facility

[75] Staff at the care facility submitted that they held nil concerns in relation to DT's decision making for the adult about his medical, dental and health care requirements. DT is 'very contactable'.
[76] ZG is regularly reviewed by a geriatrician and neurologist. DT has engaged with care staff in relation to restrictive practice matters. The facility is compliant with their requirements under the Aged Care Act 1997 (Cth) in relation to restrictive practices in aged care.
[77] ZG requires 24/7 care to best support him.
[78] ZG always has what he needs. His fridge is full of his favourite snacks.
[79] There has been no indication from the facility's finance team to suggest that the adult's care fees are not being paid.

[80] At the hearings the adult was heard to submit the following information:

(a) Guardianship to my sister to me and associate from the government - to the end of my life in a couple of years' time. To appoint [SS] as my guardian. She would provide care and attention to me. I am sure she will do a good job. [SS] is very active and particular. To set up a power of attorney that works. The law has to be flexible.

(b) [DT] has tried her best and has not been able to give me what I really require. It is attention - not on a sporadic basis.

(c) You have to have records. Records are not freely available. You need to have information. I haven't been able to access my records for twelve months to two years.

(d) I would like to go to Melbourne. Moving to Melbourne would be a good change - spend more time with cousins, sister, brother-in-law - not that the world is rosy but try to grow the roses first.

(e) The amount of money and somebody complaining about - available to pay out my debts - never heard anybody complain about it.

(f) I cannot understand that is all it has come from - it is distressing.

(g) I hope people would change their way in what is happening today.

[81] The submissions of the adult's legal representative included the following information:

(a) The adult has informed her on several occasions that he desires to return to living in Victoria to be closer to his five siblings.

(b) ZG would like to focus on physiotherapy and other rehabilitation therapies to assist him to be able to return to dancing.

(c) The adult reports that he has no access to his money or visibility of his bank statements. He is concerned that appropriate diligence is not being paid in relation to the necessary upkeep and repairs of the Wangaratta property by his attorney and that he holds concerns in relation to the attorney's ability to manage this asset in a way that protects his financial interests.

(d) The adult holds concerns, based on the oral submissions of the attorney at the hearing of 18 September 2025, as to whether the attorney has appropriately and properly dealt with the proceeds of the sale of his Tweed Heads apartment.

(e) At the hearing of 18 September 2025 the attorney stated her intention to sell the adult's commercial property in Wangaratta, Victoria. The adult does not wish for the property to be sold. The property had been 'in the family for generations' and was gifted to him by his grandfather in the 1980s. If the property were to be sold by the attorney, ZG would lose any opportunity to review the situation.

(f) The adult has no confidence in the attorney's ability to act appropriately in relation to the proceeds of the sale of the Victorian property.

(g) The attorney has failed to provide documentary evidence of the financial decisions she undertook on behalf of the adult, including those in relation to the sale of the Tweed Heads property. It is questionable that the adult had such significant credit card debt upon the commencement of the attorney's financial power. It is a concern that the attorney has, by her own admission, not collated all documentation, including receipts, as attorneys are required to keep contemporaneous records.

(h) The adult may require decisions in relation to his accommodation, health care and financial matters and that, if the Tribunal has concerns regarding the making of the Enduring Power of Attorney and the appointment of the enduring guardian, it may be reasonable and justifiable that the adult's rights are restricted by the appointment of a guardian and administrator who is nominated by the adult.

(i) The adult has advised that he believes SS to be appropriate for appointment as his guardian and administrator.

(j) Should the Tribunal be minded to make a permanent decision in relation to the administration application, the appointment of the Public Trustee of Queensland would be appropriate.

[82] The adult has demonstrated consistency, over a protracted period of time, in his stated desire to reside in Melbourne in the hope of greater contact with members of his family of origin. Over the same period of time, the adult's health and wellbeing have deteriorated, and his behaviours of concern have increased. A decision is therefore required in relation to the adult's accommodation.
[83] ZG is subject to the restrictive practice of chemical restraint within a residential aged care setting. Ongoing decisions are required in relation to withholding consent or, alternatively, providing consent in compliance with section 15GA of the Quality of Care Principles 2014 (Cth) ('QOCP'), on behalf of the adult, to being administered medication that is being prescribed for the primary purpose of controlling his behaviour.
[84] The adult has complex health care considerations in the context of his mental and physical health deterioration due to the progression of Parkinson's disease. Decisions in relation to health care and service provision (including allied health service provision and community access support) will therefore continue to be necessary.
[85] ZG has complex financial matters that relate to his personal and business interests. At present, his budget is in deficit with residential aged care fees exceeding his income. His business interests are being finalised and his taxation obligations are being determined. Further, whilst the adult retains his property in Wangaratta his cash assets will deplete in a matter of months. Ongoing financial decisions are required.

Determination of the application for the appointment of a guardian for ZG and for an order about an Enduring Power of Attorney (personal matters)

[86] SS has been unable to substantiate her allegations of the attorney's neglect of the adult.
[87] The evidence before the Tribunal is that the adult has complex physical, emotional, behavioural and mental health conditions. DT sought the opinion of medical professionals in different hospitals in order to understand the impact of the adult's progressive neurological condition on his personal and financial decision making. DT understood her obligations when advised that the Enduring Power of Attorney should be enacted and engaged with the adult's treating team, including social workers, to ensure the adult was discharged from hospital to an appropriate accommodation setting.
[88] As a consequence of DT's actions as personal Enduring Power of Attorney for the adult, ZG is accommodated within a facility which provides him with 24/7 support and supervision at a location in close proximity to the community in which he has lived for the past nineteen years and where he has been able to continue to enjoy regular contact with his children and grandchild. The adult receives targeted care in accordance with his individualised care plan and has scheduled medical and dental reviews.
[89] The evidence from DT, corroborated by management and clinical staff and the residential aged care facility, is that DT has made health care decisions in accordance with the recommendations of the clinical professionals. She has consulted with clinical staff at the residential aged care facility to make informed decisions as the adult's personal attorney in relation to providing consent for ZG to receive medication prescribed for the primary purpose of controlling his challenging behaviour as a consequence of his delusions and hallucinations. There is no evidence before the Tribunal that the restrictive practice of chemical restraint is not occurring in accordance with the Aged Care Act 1997 (Cth) and the Quality of Care Principles 2014 (Cth).
[90] Whilst the adult has been in residential aged care, DT has contracted a personal carer for ZG who supports him to frequently access the community to undertake activities in accordance with his wishes.
[91] The adult's access to his phone has created challenges (e.g. the call to 000 in response to his delusions; calling DT up to 15 times in one day). Despite ZG having difficulty operating his phone, and against a background of ongoing delusions, he has been enabled, by DT, to have significant phone contact with family members, including SS. There is no substantiated evidence before the Tribunal that DT has limited the adult's contact with other family members.
[92] The Tribunal accepts the evidence of DT that she has heard and responded to the adult's voiced desire to move to Melbourne so that he may receive visits from his sister SS and other family members. It is the evidence of DT, the adult's attorney, that she has engaged with family members in her contemplation of the utility of the adult's stated desire to move to Melbourne.
[93] The evidence is that DT is not convinced such a move would be in the adult's best interests, as the adult has never resided in Melbourne and that such a move would negatively impact the nature and extent of contact with herself, her brother and her child (the adult's grandson). DT has also submitted that other family members in Victoria have told her they would be unlikely to visit the adult, as often as the adult may suppose, should he be relocated to Melbourne.
[94] The evidence establishes that DT, as the Enduring Power of Attorney for personal matters for ZG, has acted in accordance with her legislative requirements under the POAA, including the general principles.
[95] The evidence is insufficient to revoke the Enduring Power of Attorney that ZG put into place when he had capacity to do so.
[96] Notwithstanding the above, the adult remains unchanged in his desire to move to Melbourne to be close to SS and other family members. The Tribunal is mindful of the adult's cognitive status and the impact of his delusions and hallucinations on his behaviour. The Tribunal accepts the evidence of the adult's care providers that his challenging behaviours have escalated in recent months and at a time when the applications of SS have been before the Tribunal, and acknowledges the adult's ongoing distress in the context of the attorney's considered decision for his accommodation to remain unchanged during this time. The Tribunal is not satisfied that the unrelenting cognitions which the adult articulates in relation to his accommodation matters are not associated with the escalation of his challenging behaviours.
[97] The Tribunal is not satisfied that DT would be able to continue to discharge effective decision making in relation to the matter of the adult's accommodation given the adult's ongoing cognitions around relocating to Melbourne and his inability to accept the decision making of the attorney in this matter to date. The Tribunal, therefore, is not satisfied that, in the current circumstances given the adult's cognitions, DT's continuation as Enduring Power of Attorney for the personal matter of accommodation for the adult, would enable and support the adult to achieve maximum physical, social, emotional and intellectual potential.[8]
[98] Who should be appointed as guardian for the accommodation matter? There is no evidence before the Tribunal that SS understands the complex nature of the adult's condition. SS has been inconsistent in her submissions in relation to relocating the adult to Melbourne, and has told the Tribunal that the adult's desire to move to Melbourne is not her primary concern. Furthermore, in her evidence to the Tribunal, SS has submitted that her relationship and communication with DT has been fractured as a consequence of her actions which she has described as attempts to advance the adult's interests. The Tribunal is therefore not satisfied that SS would be able to effectively and adequately consult with DT and the adult's son and grandson should she be appointed as guardian for the accommodation matter. For these reasons, the Tribunal is not satisfied that SS would be able to discharge effective decision making in accordance with the GAA.
[99] The evidence establishes that an independent guardian for accommodation matters would be better placed to consult effectively with the adult and all parties in order to make decisions that meet the adult's needs and protect his interests, in accordance with the general principles.[9] The Tribunal determines that the Public Guardian, as an independent, skilful and experienced decision-maker, is appropriate for appointment as guardian for ZG, having regard to the provisions of section 15 of the GAA.
[100] The Tribunal, therefore, appoints the Public Guardian as guardian for ZG for the matter of accommodation, under section 15 of the GAA. This appointment is until further order of the Tribunal. The appointment is reviewable and is to be reviewed in twelve (12) months to allow adequate time for the matters to be given appropriate consideration and in consideration of any change to the adult's cognitions around accommodation matters in the intervening period.
[101] The following Enduring Power of Attorney for ZG is overtaken by the making of this appointment and, in accordance with section 22(2) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), can no longer be acted upon to the extent that this appointment has been made: The Enduring Power of Attorney dated 3 August 2023 appointing DT as attorney for ZG for financial, personal and health matters.
[102] DT is to continue to act as the adult's attorney under the Enduring Power of Attorney dated 3 August 2023 for all other personal matters, including the personal matter of restrictive practices in aged care.

Determination of the applications of SS for the appointment of an administrator for ZG and for an order about an Enduring Power of Attorney (financial matters)

[103] The evidence before the Tribunal from DT is that, as financial attorney, she has identified and made decisions in relation to the assets, income, liabilities and expenditure of the adult. The matters have been complex and have involved the adult's personal and business interests. The attorney has attended to the financial obligations of ZG, which have included the following: the preparation of his Tweed Heads property for sale; the sale of that property (including real estate commission and legal costs); payment of monies owed on credit cards; payment of the adult's residential aged care fees; payment of the adult's personal carer to support him to access to the community; the leasing, repair and maintenance of the Wangaratta property; engaging an accountant to resolve commercial taxation matters (including GST and capital gains tax from the sale of the adult's business); and obtaining and acting upon advice from a financial planner.
[104] The attorney has provided oral evidence that the adult's budget is in deficit and that his cash reserves (at $10,000 when she commenced acting) are now approximately $22,000. It is the evidence of the attorney that, upon obtaining financial advice, the retention of the adult's Wangaratta property is not sustainable, given the costs associated in repairs and maintenance of the property, the adult's ongoing residential aged care fees and the calculated refundable accommodation deposit of $450,000.
[105] The attorney has provided written evidence of payment of the adult's residential age care fees.
[106] It is the evidence of the attorney that she has acted in accordance with the provisions of the POAA.
[107] SS and the adult (with the assistance of his legal representative) have questioned the accuracy of the attorney's oral submissions, however they have not presented any evidence to the Tribunal that the attorney has acted contrary to the provisions of the POAA.
[108] Given the oral evidence of the attorney, it is a valid decision for an attorney to make to realise the assets of an adult with impaired capacity, so that funds can be made available for that person's ongoing residential aged care, particularly in circumstances where the adult's cash reserves are to depleted in a matter of months.
[109] The oral evidence establishes that DT has taken into account and respected the adult's privacy and has not disclosed his financial information from persons such as SS who were not appointed by him as his enduring financial attorney.
[110] Of concern to the Tribunal are the allegations made by the adult that he has been unable to obtain his own financial information from the attorney and that the attorney has not consulted with him in relation to financial decisions.
[111] The evidence before the Tribunal is that the adult has complex cognitive and psychological conditions due to the progression of Parkinson's disease. The Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the attorney has or has not consulted with the adult in relation to financial decisions, given his complex clinical picture and documented memory deficits. The Tribunal makes no finding in this regard.
[112] Notwithstanding the above, the adult remains unchanged in his desire for DT to be removed as his Enduring Power of Attorney. Furthermore, as a consequence of DT providing oral evidence to the Tribunal at the hearing on 18 September 2025 about the nature and scope of her actions and decisions since commencing power as the adult's financial attorney, including her intention to sell the Wangaratta property, the adult has increased his efforts for the attorney to be replaced by a formally appointed decision maker.
[113] Once again, the Tribunal is mindful of the adult's cognitive status and the impact of his delusions and hallucinations on his behaviour. The Tribunal accepts the evidence of the adult's care providers that his challenging behaviours have escalated in recent months and at a time when the applications of SS have been before the Tribunal, and acknowledges the adult's ongoing distress in the context of the attorney's financial decision making.
[114] The Tribunal is not satisfied that the adult's expressed cognitions in relation to DT acting as his financial Enduring Power of Attorney are not associated with the escalation of his challenging behaviours.
[115] In these circumstances, the Tribunal is not satisfied, that the adult's health and wellbeing would not be impacted should DT continue to act as the adult's financial attorney, given his unrelenting opposition to remaining in the current residential aged care facility and to DT continuing to act as his financial attorney in circumstances when she has stated her intention, albeit based on financial advice, to sell his property in Victoria. The Tribunal, therefore, is not satisfied that, in the current circumstances given the adult's cognitions, DT's continuation as Enduring Power of Attorney for financial matters for the adult, would enable and support the adult to achieve maximum physical, social, emotional and intellectual potential.[10]
[116] The evidence is insufficient to revoke the Enduring Power of Attorney that ZG put into place when he had capacity to do so, in the context of the adult's current cognitions.
[117] Who should be appointed as administrator for the adult at this time? SS has made varying submissions to the Tribunal seeking appointment as the adult's sole or joint Enduring Power of Attorney or administrator for financial matters, whilst failing to evidence her purported appropriateness for appointment. SS has also submitted that her relationship and communication with DT has been fractured as a consequence of her actions which she has described as attempts to advance the adult's interests. The Tribunal is therefore not satisfied that SS would be able to adequately consult with DT and the adult's son and grandson should she be appointed as administrator for ZG. For these reasons, the Tribunal is not satisfied that SS would be able to discharge effective decision making in accordance with the GAA.
[118] The Tribunal determines that an independent administrator is necessary to: give effect to the accommodation decision of the guardian and consult with the adult, DT (as his personal attorney for all other personal matters except accommodation matters) and all relevant parties in order to make decisions that meet the adult's needs and protect his interests in accordance with the GAA, including the general principles.[11]
[119] The Tribunal determines that the Public Trustee of Queensland, as an independent, skilful and experienced decision-maker, is appropriate for appointment as administrator for ZG, having regard to the provisions of section 15 of the GAA.
[120] Accordingly, the Tribunal appoints the Public Trustee of Queensland as administrator for ZG for all financial matters. The Tribunal dispenses with the requirement for the administrator to provide a financial management plan. The Tribunal directs the administrator to provide accounts to the Tribunal when requested. This appointment is until further order of the Tribunal. The appointment is reviewable and is to be reviewed in twelve (12) months to allow adequate time for the matters to be given appropriate consideration and in consideration of any change to the adult's cognitions around DT in the intervening period.
[121] The following Enduring Power of Attorney for ZG is overtaken by the making of this appointment and, in accordance with section 22(2) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld), can no longer be acted upon to the extent that this appointment has been made: The Enduring Power of Attorney dated 3 August 2023 appointing DT as attorney for ZG for financial, personal and health matters.

Determination of the applications of ZG for the appointment of an administrator under interim order and for directions

[122] These applications were submitted in the context of the adult's financial attorney remaining in place in circumstances where the Tribunal had reserved its decision about the substantive applications of SS for the appointment of a guardian, administrator and an order about an Enduring Power of Attorney. The primary purpose of the adult's applications was to prevent the attorney selling his Wangaratta property prior to the Tribunal's final determination of the applications of SS.
[123] As the Tribunal has made decisions in relation to the above substantive applications, the application for the appointment of an administrator under interim order has become lacking in substance and is therefore dismissed under section 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld).
[124] The Public Trustee of Queensland, as the appointed administrator for ZG, is mandated to act in accordance with the GAA in its decision-making pertaining to the entirety of the adult's financial matters, including those in relation to the adult's real property. As such, the Tribunal declines to make directions. Accordingly, the application for directions is dismissed under section 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld).

Application of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld)

[125] ZG's rights to privacy,[12] property,[13] freedom of movement,[14] cultural considerations[15] and protection from being subjected to medical treatment without his full, free and informed consent[16] may be engaged and limited by the decision of the Tribunal to appoint a guardian and administrator for the adult and overtake his Enduring Power of Attorney dated 3 August 2023. On balance, the decision of the Tribunal provides for the adult to receive necessary support for decisions in relation to health care, service provision and financial matters. Taking into account the above findings in relation to the criteria set out in the GAA, the Tribunal is satisfied that the decision of the Tribunal is the least restrictive option given the adult's vulnerability and that the benefits of the decision of the Tribunal outweigh any limitations imposed on the adult's human rights. Accordingly, the Tribunal determines that the limits imposed by the decision of the Tribunal are reasonable and demonstrably justified in accordance with section 13 of the HRA.

[3] Ibid sch 4 (definition of 'capacity').

[5] POAA s 6C, general principle 1.

[7] Lambourne and Ors v Marrable and Ors [2023] QSC 219, [42]-[43].

[8] POAA s 6C, general principle 3.

[10] POAA s 6C, general principle 3.

Administration Act 2000

Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009

ZG [2025] QCAT 399 (20 October 2025)

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Source

Judgment (61 paragraphs)

Legislation Cited (5)