Introduction

In a recent Western Australian State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) decision, CK [2025] WASAT 27, we see important principles regarding capacity, financial abuse, and coercive control in the context of guardianship and administration applications. The case involved a 63-year-old man diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder at age 61, who later developed schizophrenia. Following his mother's sudden death in 2022, CK was found wandering the streets dehydrated and was hospitalized. Originally, the Public Advocate was appointed as his guardian in early 2023. Later that year, CK signed several legal documents including a will, an enduring power of attorney appointing his sister as attorney, and an advance health directive consenting to participate in medical research. When CK was re-admitted to hospital in 2024 with declining mental health, allegations of financial and emotional abuse emerged. The Tribunal ultimately revoked the enduring power of attorney, declared the advance health directive invalid, and appointed the Public Trustee as administrator and the Public Advocate as guardian.

Understanding Coercive Control in Vulnerable Adults

Coercive control is often discussed in the context of intimate partner relationships, but it can manifest in other relationships as well, particularly where there is a power imbalance. In guardianship matters, this can appear in relationships between vulnerable adults and their family members or caregivers.

In the CK case, the Tribunal noted that CK's support coordinator described certain behaviors from his sister that could be interpreted as controlling. The coordinator reported that the sister "aggressively interjected denying [CK] the freedom to participate in the conversation" and showed "confrontational body language" in meetings about CK's care.

It's important to note that in this case, the Tribunal did not find that the sister was deliberately engaging in coercive control, acknowledging that her actions likely stemmed from family communication patterns, grief, and genuine concern for her brother. The Tribunal noted: "I do not accept this as deliberate behaviour on EK's part designed to control and isolate CK."

This nuanced approach reminds us that what may appear as controlling behavior can sometimes be the result of complex family dynamics, particularly when families have established patterns of interaction that may seem problematic to outsiders.

Financial Abuse and Vulnerable Adults

Financial abuse of vulnerable adults is a serious concern in guardianship applications. The CK case highlights several warning signs:

Large or frequent cash withdrawals: CK's bank statements showed cash withdrawals totaling $16,260 over five months, with individual withdrawals as high as $3,600.
Blurred financial boundaries: The Tribunal observed that there seemed to be no distinction between "CK's money" and "EK's money," with funds being treated as "family money."
Lack of repayment arrangements: CK was giving substantial sums to his sister with no expectation of repayment.
Decision-making vulnerability: CK's support workers reported that "he will avoid conflict by agreeing with other people and by doing what he is told" and would "put EK's needs before his own needs."

The Tribunal determined that CK was "unable to identify and assess the financial implications of particular items of expenditure or of financial decisions," which made him particularly vulnerable.

Capacity Assessment in Financial Decision-Making

In determining whether a person lacks capacity to make financial decisions, the Tribunal follows principles established in case law. In FY [2019] WASAT 118, the Tribunal outlined what a person must be able to do to make reasonable judgments about their estate, including:

Identifying and calculating necessary expenditure for daily living and longer-term financial objectives
Devising a budget to live within their means
Organizing their affairs to meet debts as they fall due
Identifying and assessing financial implications of particular expenditure or decisions
Identifying and implementing problem-solving strategies for unexpected financial issues

The CK case demonstrates how these principles apply in practice. The Tribunal found CK lacked capacity because he was unable to fulfill these requirements, noting his ongoing reliance on his sister to pay bills and his inability to identify his own financial needs.

The Validity of Enduring Documents

An important aspect of the CK case concerns the validity of documents signed by persons with questionable capacity. The Tribunal declared CK's advance health directive invalid as he did not understand the nature of the treatment decisions or their consequences—specifically, he had consented to participate in medical research involving placebos but later stated he didn't want that.

Similarly, the enduring power of attorney was revoked because CK lacked the cognitive capacity to make and understand such an appointment. This highlights the importance of proper capacity assessment at the time enduring documents are created.

The Least Restrictive Approach

Western Australian guardianship law emphasizes using the least restrictive option to protect vulnerable adults. The SAT considers three stages of inquiry:

Whether the person lacks capacity
Whether less restrictive alternatives to formal orders exist
Who should be appointed and with what powers

In CK, the Tribunal carefully considered whether informal arrangements or statutory provisions (like s110ZD of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 for medical decisions) could meet CK's needs. Only after determining these would be insufficient did the Tribunal appoint formal decision-makers.

Conclusion

The CK case provides valuable insights into how the SAT addresses allegations of financial abuse and coercive control in guardianship matters. It demonstrates the careful balancing act required: protecting vulnerable adults while recognizing family dynamics and applying the least restrictive approach possible.

For practitioners, this case emphasizes the importance of thorough capacity assessment when clients create enduring documents, and the need to be alert to potential financial abuse while avoiding hasty judgments about family relationships.

For families of vulnerable adults, the case highlights the importance of maintaining clear financial boundaries and formal arrangements even when intentions are good, to protect both the vulnerable person and family relationships in the long term.

This blog post is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.