There is no single legal definition of mental capacity in Western Australia. As a lawyer specializing in guardianship cases, this question is frequently top-of-mind when dealing with some of my clients.
It is important to understand the nuances of determining mental capacity in legal matters. The definition varies depending on the type of decision or transaction involved.
There are various legal tests for mental capacity, such as the test for testamentary capacity.
Despite the many different legal tests, the fundamental issue is whether the client is able to understand the general nature of what they are doing. If there is ongoing difficulty in this level of understanding it may indicate a lack of mental capacity which requires further exploration by the lawyer.
Any work done for a client who it later turns out lacked mental capacity could be invalid and expose the lawyer to potential legal and ethical issues.
For example, a client may appear to have the mental capacity to create a will, but in reality, they may be suffering from dementia and unable to understand the consequences of their actions. This could lead to the will being challenged and the lawyer facing potential legal repercussions.
Another example is, a client may not have the mental capacity to make a contract, but have mental capacity to make a will. A lawyer should be aware of this and should not proceed with the contract if they suspect the client lacks mental capacity. If a lawyer fails to do so, it could lead to the contract being challenged and the lawyer facing potential legal repercussions.
See a publication produced by The Law Society of New South Wales entitled “When a client’s mental capacity is in doubt – A practical guide for solicitors”, dated 2016" for more information.
Compensating for Injury to Feelings: A Standard Part of Defamation Damages
Many people are surprised to learn that damages for injury to feelings can be awarded in defamation cases. In addition to protecting one's reputation, the tort of defamation also recognizes the harm caused by hurt feelings.
Lord Diplock stated, "The harm caused to the plaintiff by the publication of a libel upon him often lies more in his own feelings, what he thinks other people are thinking of him, than in any actual change made manifest in their attitude towards him."
An award for injury to feelings is a standard part of compensatory damages. Additionally, if the defendant's conduct has exacerbated the plaintiff's injury, they may also be entitled to "aggravated damages." It's important to note that corporations cannot claim injury to feelings.
It's possible for a plaintiff to prove injury to reputation by showing they have been "shunned and avoided" by others as a result of the defamatory statement. BUT, such evidence can also demonstrate substantial hurt to the plaintiff's feelings.
Why Clients Should Ask About a Lawyer's Experience Before Hiring
Why Clients Don't Ask Lawyers About Their Experience Before Hiring Them:
When it comes to hiring a lawyer, many clients assume that all lawyers are created equal. They trust in the reputation of the law firm and assume that any lawyer from the firm will be competent.
However, this is not always the case, and clients can be taken by surprise when a relatively junior lawyer, with little experience in the subject matter, is handling their case.
Here are some reasons why this happens to clients:
1. Lack of knowledge or understanding about the legal process: Many clients may not fully understand how the legal process works and may not know what questions to ask.
2. Trust in the law firm's reputation: Clients may trust in the reputation of the law firm and assume that any lawyer from the firm will be competent.
3. A belief that more experienced lawyers will oversee and guide the junior lawyers: Clients may assume that more experienced lawyers will oversee and guide the work of the junior lawyers, so they don't ask about the experience of the specific lawyer handling their case.
4. Lack of time or resources to research and compare different lawyers: Clients may not have the time or resources to research and compare different lawyers or law firms.
5. A belief that all lawyers have the same level of expertise and experience: Clients may assume that all lawyers have the same level of expertise and experience, so they don't ask about the experience of the specific lawyer handling their case.
6. Being referred by someone they trust: Clients may be referred to a law firm by someone they trust, and may not feel the need to ask further questions.
7. Being in a difficult or emotional state: Clients may be in a difficult or emotional state and may not think clearly about the hiring process.
8. Not wanting to appear rude or difficult: Clients may not want to appear rude or difficult by asking too many questions.
9. Cost of hiring a lawyer: Clients may assume that the cheapest option is the best option, and may not ask about the experience of the specific lawyer handling their case.
10. Not wanting to take the time to interview multiple lawyers: Clients may not want to take the time to interview multiple lawyers and compare them.
It's important for clients to understand that not all lawyers have the same level of expertise and experience. Before hiring a lawyer, it's essential to ask about their experience and qualifications and research different options.
Even just to ask their first-point-of-contact at the firm (who is often just a 'white label'), "Who will be my actual lawyer? Will you just be supervising that person? How many of this type of case has that lawyer handled during the last 5 years? Can you send me any published cases in which they acted?"
These are essential questions in an era of high settlement. These days even many independent barristers have never done a trial as lead counsel. Without doing due diligence, clients can be surprised the actual lawyer handling their case might be an "L Plater" in the particular area of the law.
Remember the adage, "... the more you know".
Navigating Guardianship Applications: Some “signs” for Families Affected by Dementia
GUARDIANSHIP ... it is important to be aware of the early signs of dementia and the difference between dementia and Alzheimer's disease.
Dementia is the term used to describe losing one's memory and speech, with Alzheimer's disease being the most common cause.
In the early stages, it may appear as exaggerated forgetfulness, but as the disease progresses, memory loss, changes in thinking and speech, and changes in behavior may occur.
Other diseases that can cause dementia include vascular dementia, caused by small strokes, and Lewy body disease, which also presents symptoms similar to Parkinson's disease.
Although dementia is not hereditary, an early diagnosis is important as there are treatments that can be offered and it is important to prepare for the future.
Keep an eye out for extraordinary forgetfulness and out of character behaviour, such as putting food in the wrong place or tripping over words in conversation.
If you notice these signs, encourage your family members to seek medical attention for a proper diagnosis.
If you or someone you know needs help applying for or dealing with a guardianship application at the State Administrative Tribunal of Western Australia, please don't hesitate to contact me for assistance. I'm here to help, having acted in more than 100 such applications during the last 5 years.
Lawyers of the Future: How AI and AVR are Transforming the Junior Lawyers' Tasks and Costs
As technology continues to advance, the legal industry is also evolving. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Automatic Voice Recognition (AVR) are becoming increasingly prevalent in the field and are changing the way junior lawyers work.
In this blog post, I take a closer look at how AI and AVR can assist junior lawyers in their daily tasks and how they can free up time for more important and value-adding tasks. Moreover, I will examine how these technology can help to reduce costs and increase access to justice.
To begin, let's take a look at a breakdown of tasks that a typical 40 hour workweek for a junior lawyer doing litigation might look like, with an estimate of how many of those hours could potentially be done by AI, specifically natural language processing models, with the assistance of an operator and how many hours could be done by Automatic Voice Recognition (AVR):
It's important to note that this is just an estimate based on my analysis and not a scientific study.
This analysis is drawn from my common sense analysis and my tech knowledge and insights over the last few months and my many years of being, working with, supervising and employing junior lawyers.
As we can see from this table, AI can assist junior lawyers in tasks such as legal research, document review, and contract drafting.
These tasks are typically time-consuming for junior lawyers, but with the help of AI, they can be done more efficiently and accurately.
This can free up 22 hours a week for more important and value-adding tasks.
AVR can also play a major role in the legal field, by transcribing audio recordings of meetings and hearings, which can be a time-consuming task for junior lawyers, to sit in meetings making notes.
This could save an additional 2 hours a week, allowing junior lawyers to focus on more important and value-adding tasks such as analysis and decision making.
The benefits of AI and AVR go beyond just saving time, they also have the potential to reduce costs and increase access to justice for clients in dramatic ways.
High legal costs can be a barrier to justice for many individuals and businesses.
By using AI to efficiently complete tasks such as legal research, document review, and contract drafting, and AVR for transcribing audio recordings, legal professionals can help to make the legal process more efficient and affordable, which can increase access to justice for many people.
While these technologies are not meant to replace human judgement, they are designed to assist and make the legal process more efficient. This means that junior lawyers will have more time to focus on higher-level tasks and provide better service to clients.
As the legal industry continues to evolve, it's important for junior lawyers to be aware of the advancements in technology and to embrace the opportunities they provide.
With AI and AVR, we can work smarter, not harder, and provide even better service to our clients while also helping to reduce costs and increase access to justice.
It's an exciting time for the legal industry and I can't wait to see how these technologies will continue to shape and improve the way we work.
What are the consequences of being a publisher of defamatory third party comments on social media?
DEFAMATION ... In Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Voller [2021] HCA 27 the High Court affirmed traditional concepts of what a 'publisher' is in defamation law (in the context of social media).
1. The media companies Fairfax Media Publications, Nationwide News, and Australian News Channel were held liable for defamation as publishers of third party comments made on their public Facebook pages.
2. The High Court of Australia determined that liability as a publisher does not require knowledge of the defamatory matter and that any act of participation in the communication of defamatory matter to a third party is sufficient to render a person a publisher.
3. Importantly, the Court found that the degree of active and voluntary participation is irrelevant, provided that some kind of involvement can be proved.
4. The media companies were held liable for defamation as publishers of the defamatory third party comments because they actively and voluntarily participated in the process of making the comments available for comprehension by a third party.
If you have been a victim of defamation on social media, feel welcome to contact me to discuss your options.
Financial Elder Abuse: A Serious Issue Affecting Older Australians
As a guardianship lawyer, I've seen first-hand the devastating effects of financial elder abuse on Australian seniors.
If you are a financial advisor, read this blog for signs that financial elder abuse may be happening to your clients, and what role you can play in protecting your clients.
Financial elder abuse is a serious issue that affects many older Australians every year. Elder abuse can take many forms, including financial exploitation, physical abuse, and emotional abuse.
As financial advisors, you are often in a prime (and sometimes ‘only’) position to be aware of the signs of elder abuse and to take action when you suspect that a client may be at risk.
The following are 5 signs that financial elder abuse may be happening:
Sudden changes in financial arrangements, such as the appointment of a new power of attorney or the transfer of assets to a new account.
Unexplained withdrawals from accounts or the use of an elderly person's funds without their knowledge or consent.
The appearance of new "friends" who are taking an interest in the elderly person's financial affairs, especially if they seem to be trying to isolate the person from their family and trusted advisors.
Changes in the elderly person's demeanour or behaviour, such as increased confusion or agitation, that may be caused by financial stress or exploitation.
Unexpected changes in the elderly person's financial situation, such as sudden debts or unpaid bills.
To help protect your clients from elder abuse, there are several steps you can take:
Stay in regular contact with your clients. This will help you to stay informed about their financial situation and to identify any changes that may be cause for concern.
Be aware of the signs of elder abuse. If you notice any unusual activity in your client's accounts or if you have concerns about the well-being of an elderly client, it's important to take action.
Work with other professionals. If you have concerns about a client, consider reaching out to other professionals, such as lawyers or social workers, for guidance on how to proceed.
Educate your clients about the dangers of elder abuse. Help your clients to develop strategies for protecting themselves, such as setting up a power of attorney (if they have capacity) or working with a trusted family member or friend.
By taking these steps, financial advisors can play a critical role in protecting their elderly clients from financial elder abuse. If you have any questions or would like to discuss how I can assist, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Successful Review of Guardianship and Administration Decision in Western Australia
We recently acted for the applicants in a review of a decision made under the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA). You can read the full decision here.
The applicants, MD and DM, applied for a review of a decision made by a single member of the Tribunal, Member Conley, on 6 September 2022.
In the original decision, Member Conley declared that the represented person (NA) was unable to make reasonable judgments in respect of matters relating to her estate, person, and health and safety, and therefore needed an administrator of her estate and a guardian. The Tribunal then made orders revoking the enduring powers of attorney and guardianship in place and appointed the Public Trustee as plenary administrator and the Public Advocate as limited guardian.
On our clients behalf, we then applied for a review by the Full Tribunal.
After reviewing the case, the Full Tribunal decided to revoke the original orders and reinstate the enduring power of guardianship and power of attorney in favour of MD and DM.
In relation to guardianship, the Full Tribunal found that NA was unable to make decisions regarding her own health and safety and needed oversight, care, and control. However, the Full Tribunal also found that a less restrictive means was available in the form of an enduring power of guardianship (EPG) previously made by the individual. As a result, the Full Tribunal revoked the orders appointing a limited guardian and reinstated the EPG, naming two of the individual's daughters as joint guardians.
In relation to administration, the Full Tribunal found that NA’s vascular dementia rendered her unable to make reasonable judgments in relation to matters concerning her estate, but that the appointment of an administrator was not necessary as the less restrictive option of the enduring power of attorney in favour of MD and DM was available.
We are proud to have been able to assist MD and DM. A job well-done by Isaac Priddis, who appeared for our clients at the hearing.
If you would like to hire a lawyer to act on your behalf in a guardianship matter, please don't hesitate to contact me. I would be happy to discuss your options and how I can assist you.
I acted in 30 separate such matters in 2022 alone and offer a specialist service.
The "Serious Harm Test" for Defamation in (Western) Australia
As a defamation lawyer in Western Australia, I am often asked about the requirements for bringing a defamation claim.
While the WA State Government has agreed with the Federal Government and other States and Territories to introduce the "serious harm test" by amending the Defamation Act 2005 (WA) at some stage, we do not yet know when this will be legislated.
Currently, the triviality defense continues to apply to all publications in Western Australia.
The serious harm test is already in effect in other jurisdictions in Australia, including New South Wales. This arose from a two-stage review of the Model Defamation Provisions.
The serious harm test replaced the triviality defence for publications in NSW made on or after July 1, 2021. For publications before that date, the triviality defence still applies and there is no requirement to show serious harm.
Under the serious harm test, plaintiffs in defamation cases must prove on the balance of probabilities that the relevant publication "has caused, or is likely to cause, serious harm" to their reputation.
The determination of serious harm may consider evidence such as the scale of the publication and its readership, as well as testimony from the plaintiff and other witnesses.
One notable case that addressed the serious harm test in Australia is Newman v Whittington [2022] NSWSC 249.
In this case, the court confirmed that plaintiffs must prove on the balance of probabilities that the relevant publication "has caused, or is likely to cause, serious harm" to their reputation, abolishing the common law rule that damage was to be presumed and not proved.
The court noted that the "obvious genesis" of the serious harm element came from the equivalent provision in the United Kingdom's Defamation Act 2013, with there being "no material difference" between the two.
In Newman v Whittington, the pleadings asserted that serious harm was to be inferred from the "inherent seriousness of the defamatory imputations" and from the plaintiff's reputation as a family mediator.
The court struck out the pleadings as they did not clearly articulate an arguable case, and therefore there was no evidential assessment of whether serious harm had been established.
However, the court granted leave for the plaintiff to replead her claims of serious harm given the "novelty of the point."
In order to show that serious harm has been established in a defamation case, it is important to collate as much relevant evidence as possible.
This may include evidence of the scale of the publication and its readership, testimony from the plaintiff and other witnesses about the impact of the publication on their reputation, and any other relevant evidence that demonstrates the harm caused by the defamation.
By thoroughly preparing and presenting this evidence, plaintiffs can help to strengthen their case and increase the chances of success in a defamation claim.
As a defamation lawyer, when the test applies, it will be my job to help my clients gather and present the necessary evidence to prove serious harm and seek justice when their reputations have been wrongly damaged.
This is an example of the type of evidence that will need to be collated to show serious harm:
…
Sarah is a successful business owner who has built a reputation for herself as a trustworthy and reliable source of products and services in her industry.
However, one day she discovers that a former employee has posted a series of false and defamatory statements about her on a popular social media platform.
These statements claim that Sarah is dishonest and untrustworthy, and they are accompanied by a series of misleading photos and videos that are meant to further damage her reputation.
Sarah is devastated by these false claims and knows that they could seriously harm her business if left unchecked. She immediately seeks the help of a defamation lawyer to help her take legal action against her former employee.
To prove serious harm in her defamation case, Sarah and her lawyer gather a range of evidence to demonstrate the impact of the defamatory statements on her reputation.
This evidence includes:
Testimony from Sarah and other witnesses about the impact of the defamatory statements on her reputation, including any negative feedback or comments she has received from customers or business partners.
Evidence of the scale of the publication, such as the number of views, shares, and comments on the social media posts.
Screenshots of the defamatory statements and accompanying photos and videos, as well as any other relevant evidence demonstrating the harm caused by the defamation.
Documentation of any financial losses or other damages suffered as a result of the defamation, such as a decline in sales or loss of business opportunities.
By presenting this evidence to the court, Sarah and her lawyer are able to make a strong case that the defamatory statements have caused, or are likely to cause, serious harm to her reputation.
With this evidence in hand, they are able to seek justice for the damage caused by the defamation and help to restore Sarah's reputation in the eyes of her customers and business partners.
The Importance of a Well-Crafted Apology in Defamation Cases
Apologising is not always easy, but it is a crucial part of maintaining healthy relationships and repairing damage caused by our actions.
As a defamation lawyer, I see firsthand the importance of a well-crafted apology. Written and signed apologies are usually a crucial element of an overall settlement of a defamation case.
According to a recent TED talk published on YouTube, good apologies generally share certain elements. Here are some key points to consider when apologising:
1. Accept responsibility for your actions. This is the "centrepiece" of an apology and involves acknowledging and understanding the impact of your actions on the other person.
2. Seek to understand the perspective of the wronged party. A good apology isn't about making you feel better, it's about trying to repair the damage to your relationship. This means it's important to put your own ego aside and try to see things from the other person's point of view.
3, Offer a sincere apology, even if your mistake was an accident. Accidents do happen, but it's important to recognize that they can still cause harm and offer a sincere apology.
4. Clearly acknowledge wrongdoing. This means admitting specifically how you messed up and showing that you understand the impact of your actions.
5. Make an offer of repair. This can be a tangible gesture, like replacing something you damaged, or a more symbolic gesture, like expressing love and respect for the person you wronged. It's important to follow through on your offer of repair and demonstrate through your actions that you are committed to changing your behavior in the future.
By considering these elements, you can craft a sincere and effective apology that helps repair damage and strengthen relationships. There are more tips on apologies in the TED talk, "The best way to apologize (according to science)" https://lnkd.in/gK6t5VQP