WIFE SEEKS FOR APPOINTMENT OF LITIGATION GUARDIAN DUE TO HER MENTAL ILLNESS
Ibsen & Ibsen [2021] FCCA 660 (18 March 2021)
This is a property proceeding where the wife files an application for the appointment of a litigation guardian due to her mental illness which is affected due to said proceedings.
Facts:
This is an application filed in which she seeks the appointment of a solicitor to act as her litigation guardian in these proceedings. The proceedings that were filed by the wife on 4 September 2020 are in relation to the question of property settlement between the applicant and her estranged husband.
In her affidavit filed at the commencement of the proceedings , the wife identified that she has been diagnosed with a schizoaffective disorder characterised by episodic psychosis, depression and mania.
The genesis of the application for the appointment of a litigation guardian came about in circumstances where significant concerns were being raised in relation to the wife’s ability to conduct the litigation.
The wife had been admitted and discharged from the hospital on a number of occasions for mental health treatment and that she was last admitted on 26 November 2020 and had been continuously in admittance receiving inpatient treatment at the hospital since that date.
Ms Wood (solicitor of the wife) deposes that the wife, nevertheless, provided instructions to the effect that the present fragile nature of her mental health is such that she is not capable of adequately conducting or giving adequate instructions for the conduct of these proceedings.
Issue: Should the court grant the application to appoint a litigation guardian?
Law:
Analysis:
Evidence shows that the psychiatrist continues to provide care to the wife on an outpatient basis and that she has a care coordinator from the hospital’s outpatient service.
The wife is said to suffer from schizophrenia with episodes of schizoaffective disorder and that she has a chronic adjustment disorder. The report goes on to record that she had been preoccupied with regrets and sorrows which she described to be a consequence of marital trauma.
The psychiatrist goes on to record that the sooner the legal proceedings related to her divorce are concluded the less chance of relapse of psychosis and impulsive deliberate self-harm and suicidal urges are likely to occur.
From the wife’s perspective, the application has been brought against a backdrop of those diagnoses and the very real risk to the wife’s life in the context of the stressors that these proceedings bring about. It could not be more serious, from the wife’s perspective, and the need for the appointment of a litigation guardian, frankly, could not be more compelling.
The nature of this litigation is certainly acrimonious and that, undoubtedly, that has had, to date, an effect on the wife and, according to her treating psychiatrist, continues and will continue to have an ongoing effect on her so long as this litigation continues. While the court cannot prevent how long this litigation ultimately takes to resolve, in one way or the other, what it can do is remove that as a stressor from the wife and remove it as a stressor that manifests itself, from the wife’s perspective and according to her psychiatrist, in psychosis and suicidal ideation; suicidal ideation she already has attempted to act upon.
Conclusion: The court is satisfied that the wife is a person who needs a litigation guardian within the definition provided for in Rule 11.08.