The High Court has replaced a decision-making representative for an anonymised man after the court was told that care-related financial arrangements had not progressed and creditors had withdrawn, or were withdrawing, services over unpaid bills.
In an ex tempore ruling delivered on 9 July 2024, Mr Justice Mark Heslin granted an application by the Director of the Decision Support Service (DSS) to vary an order made on 21 March. The judge replaced Ms K with Mr F as the man’s decision-making representative (DMR). The ruling does not identify the man.
The March order followed an application to discharge him from wardship. The court declared that he lacked capacity in the relevant areas, appointed Ms K to assist with decisions on personal welfare, healthcare, property and financial affairs, and discharged him from wardship. The judge said it had proved impossible to give effect to that order because of the DMR’s personal circumstances, including illness.
The DSS said its supervision team had been unable to speak with Ms K during three calls in May. After the DSS was contacted about matters needing attention, including the man’s social welfare payments, Ms K said she was on sick leave. She later told the service that extended sick leave and changed personal circumstances prevented her from contacting him. On 3 July, she wrote that she had made none of the decisions for which she had been appointed and agreed that an alternative DMR should be appointed. She said she could not bring the court application herself.
The Director’s affidavit described the replacement as extremely urgent. It said the man was extremely vulnerable and that creditors, including an unnamed care provider on whom he relied, had withdrawn or were withdrawing services because of lack of payment. The judge also noted that the application had been served on Ms K, the General Solicitor for Minors and Wards of Court, and the man through his HSE case coordinator.
The court found that the Director was entitled to apply and that the March order was inoperable until the DMR was replaced. Two people had been nominated from a DSS panel, and Mr F had been approved as the proposed replacement. The ruling described him as a registered psychiatric nurse, accredited mediator and member of the Irish Auctioneers and Valuers Association, with experience in the HSE, voluntary bodies and the PTRB.
The order changes the representative named in the March decision. The ruling does not otherwise set out new decisions on the man’s care, payments or financial affairs.