Published 07 August 2018
Application for property order — presumption of competence — whether subject person lacked competence — definition of property — inherent power to make directions to prevent an abuse of process — Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1988, ss 24, 36 & 62 — Form PPPR 10. The applicant sought a property order in respect of his own property on the grounds that he partly lacked the competence to deal with his own property. The court found that there was a presumption of competence, and that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the applicant was deemed to be competent. The applicant's bare assertion was not sufficient to displace the presumption of competence. The court noted that it appeared that the applicant sought to divest himself of property, but that it was unclear which property he referred to as the applicant had made reference to concepts of legal persona and his name, which the court noted was not property as defined in the Act. The court was not satisfied that jurisdiction was established and the applications were dismissed. Exercising the inherent powers of the court, a direction was made that no further applications on the matter be accepted for filing without the Judge's express leave. Judgment Date: 27 September 2017. * * * Note: Names have been changed to comply with legal requirements * * *
This website explains many of the things you might want to know if you are coming to the Youth Court, or just wondering how the Youth Court works.
Visit website›Ministry of Justice website with information on family issues including about going to court, forms and other times when you may need help.
Visit website›For information about courts and tribunals, including going to court, finding a court & collection of fines and reparation.
Visit website›On this site you will find information about our Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and High Court including recent decisions, daily lists and news.
Visit website›