Section 87 — Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1988: Review of property orders

87 Review of property orders (1) Where a trustee corporation— (a) Has filed in a Court an application made to the trustee corporation under section 32 or section 33 of this Act to act as manager of any property of a person; or (b) Is deemed by subsection (3) or subsection (4) of section 117 of this Act to be a manager appointed under this Act in respect of the property of any person (being property the gross value of which, as at the commencement of this Act, did not exceed $100,000),— the trustee corporation shall, in accordance with subsection (1A) of this section, file in the Court the reports specified in subsection (1B) of this section. (1A) The reports required by subsection (1) of this section shall,— (a) Where subsection (1)(a) of this section applies, be filed not earlier than 2 years nor later than 3 years after the date of the filing of the application; or (b) Where subsection (1)(b) of this section applies, be filed by the date specified in the programme drawn up in accordance with the Protection of Personal and Property Rights Regulations 1988 . (1B) The reports required under subsection (1) of this section comprise— (a) a report from each of 2 medical practitioners (at least 1 of whom must be independent of the applicant, or any relative of the applicant) as to the extent to which the person subject to the order has the competence or lacks the competence to manage his or her own affairs in relation to his or her property; and (b) A report from the trustee corporation on the current condition of the person subject to the order, which report— (i) Shall indicate whether or not there has been any change in that person's condition since the application was made; and (ii) Shall contain other relevant information. (1C) If, after consideration of the reports filed in accordance with subsection (1) of this section, the Court is of the opinion— (a) That the order should be discharged or that the order should be extended; and (b) A full review by the Court in accordance with subsections (3) to (10) of this section is unnecessary,— the Court may order that the order be discharged or that the order be extended with such variation, if any, as the Court may direct. (1D) Notwithstanding subsections (1) to (1C) of this section, where the reports are filed under subsection (1)(a) of this section, the Court may if it thinks fit, either on its own motion or on the application of a person specified in subsection (2) of this section, direct that a full review of the case be undertaken and subsections (3) to (10) of this section shall apply with any necessary modification to every such review as if the original application filed in the Court were an order made by the Court. (1E) Notwithstanding subsections (1) to (1C) of this section, where the reports are filed under subsection (1)(b) of this section, the Court may if it thinks fit, either on its own motion or on the application of a person specified in subsection (2) of this section, direct that a full review of the case be undertaken and subsections (3) to (10) of this section shall apply. (1F) In any case other than a case in which reports have been filed under subsection (1) of this section in relation to a person subject to a property order, any person who, under a property order, is the manager of any property and who is of the opinion that the property order should be discharged may file in the Court— (a) a report from each of 2 medical practitioners (at least 1 of whom must be independent of the applicant or any relative of the applicant) as to the extent to which the person subject to the order has the competence to manage his or her own affairs in relation to his or her property; and (b) A report from the manager on the current condition of the person subject to the order, which report— (i) Shall set out the nature and extent of the change in that person's condition since the order was made; and (ii) Shall contain other relevant information. (1G) If, after consideration of the reports filed in accordance with subsection (1F) of this section, the Court is of the opinion— (a) That the order should be discharged; and (b) That a full review by the Court in accordance with subsections (3) to (10) of this section is unnecessary,— the Court may order that the order be discharged. (1H) Notwithstanding subsections (1F) and (1G) of this section, where an application is made under subsection (1F) of this section, the Court may if it thinks fit, either on its own motion or on the application of a person specified in subsection (2) of this section, direct that a full review of the case be undertaken and subsections (3) to (10) of this section shall apply. (2) Without limiting anything in section 31(8) of this Act or in subsections (1) to (1H) of this section, the following persons may at any time apply to a Court for a review of any property order, whether made by consent or otherwise: (a) The person in respect of whom the order was made: (b) The manager or any welfare guardian who is acting for that person: (c) Any person described in paragraphs (b) to (h) of section 26 of this Act: (d) Any other person, with the leave of the Court. (3) Without limiting the discretion of the Court on any application under subsection (2) of this section, but subject to subsection (4) of this section, on an application made pursuant to section 31(8) of this Act or where the Court directs under subsection (1D) or subsection (1E) or subsection (1H) of this section that a full review of a case be undertaken, the Court shall review the competence of the person subject to the property order to manage his or her own affairs in relation to his or her property. (4) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (3) of this section, where an application for review is made to provide for a new manager to be appointed in place of the present manager, the Court shall not be obliged to review (but may review) the matters specified in that subsection. (5) On any application for the review of a property order, the primary objectives of the Court shall be those set out in section 28 of this Act. (6) Subject to subsection (7) of this section, on any application for review of a property order, a Court may— (a) Vary or decline to vary the order; or (b) Discharge or decline to discharge the order; or (c) Extend the order; or (d) Make any order, whether in addition to or instead of the order under review. (7) On any application to which subsection (3) of this section applies, the Court shall not make any order that would extend the original order beyond the date on which it would otherwise expire unless the Court is satisfied, having regard to the relevant provisions of Part 3 of this Act, that the order continues to be necessary in the interests of the person in respect of whom it was made. (8) If the Court does make an order that extends the effect of the original order beyond the date on which it would otherwise have expired, the Court shall specify a date, being not later than 3 years after the date of the new order, by which the manager is to apply to the Court for a further review of the original order. (9) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (8) of this section, the Court may specify a date, for a further review of the original order, later than 3 years but not later than 5 years after the date of the new order if it is satisfied, in the exceptional circumstances of the case, that an earlier review is not necessary in the interests of the person to whom the order relates. (10) No order to which subsection (8) or subsection (9) of this section applies shall automatically expire by reason only of the fact that the date specified for the first review or any further review has been reached. Subsection (1) was substituted, and subsections (1A) and (1B) were inserted, as from 1 July 1994, by section 9(1) Protection of Personal and Property Rights Amendment Act 1994 (1994 No 54). Subsection (1B)(a) was substituted, as from 1 July 1996, by section 143(1) Medical Practitioners Act 1995 (1995 No 95). See clause 2 Medical Practitioners Act Commencement Order 1996 (SR 1996/162). Subsection (1B)(a) was substituted, as from 18 September 2004, by section 175(1) Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 (2003 No 48). See sections 178 to 227 of that Act as to the transitional provisions. Subsections (1C) to (1F) were inserted, as from 1 July 1994, by section 9(1) Protection of Personal and Property Rights Amendment Act 1994 (1994 No 54). Subsection (1F)(a) was substituted, as from 1 July 1996, by section 143(1) Medical Practitioners Act 1995 (1995 No 95). See clause 2 Medical Practitioners Act Commencement Order 1996 (SR 1996/162). Subsection (1F)(a) was substituted, as from 18 September 2004, by section 175(1) Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 (2003 No 48). See sections 178 to 227 of that Act as to the transitional provisions. Subsections (1G) and (1H) were inserted, as from 1 July 1994, by section 9(1) Protection of Personal and Property Rights Amendment Act 1994 (1994 No 54). Subsection (2) was amended, as from 1 July 1994, by section 9(2) Protection of Personal Property Rights Amendment Act 1994 (1994 No 54) by substituting the expression “ subsections (1) to (1H) ” for the expression “ subsection (1) ” . Subsection (3) was amended, as from 1 July 1994, by section 9(3) Protection of Personal Property Rights Amendment Act 1994 (1994 No 54) by substituting the words “ where the Court directs under subsection (1D) or subsection (1E) or subsection (1H) of this section that a full review of a case be undertaken, ” for the words “ subsection (1) of this section, ” . Subsection (10) was inserted, as from 1 July 1994, by section 9(4) Protection of Personal Property Rights Amendment Act 1994 (1994 No 54).