The Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1988 (Act) is the New Zealand law that sets out who can make decisions for an adult who has lost the mental capacity to manage their own life.
It lets the Family Court appoint a welfare guardian for personal care decisions and a property manager or administrator for money and assets. It also governs enduring powers of attorney.
This is the legal safety net that protects vulnerable adults, and understanding it now can save your family a stressful, expensive court process later.
If a stroke, dementia, or a serious accident took away a loved one’s ability to decide where they live or how their bills get paid, who would step in?
The answer depends almost entirely on this one piece of legislation, and most New Zealanders don’t find out how it works until they’re already in a crisis.
What Does the PPPR Act 1988 Actually Do?
The Act gives the Family Court the power to appoint someone to make personal and financial decisions for an adult who can’t make those decisions themselves.
It also establishes rules for enduring powers of attorney, which allow you to choose your own decision-maker in advance.
The Actapplies to adults who, because of illness, injury, or disability, either can’t understand the nature and consequences of a decision or can’t communicate that decision to others.
The Act splits decision-making into two clear categories. Personal matters include medical treatment, living arrangements, and daily care. Property matters cover money, assets, income, and financial affairs.
This split runs right through the whole Act, and it’s the reason there are different roles for different types of decisions.
A welfare guardian handles the personal side, while a property manager or administrator handles the money side.
One important principle sits at the heart of the law. Every adult is presumed to have full mental capacity until the opposite is proven.
A person isn’t treated as lacking capacity just because they make decisions that others think are unwise or imprudent.
This presumption means the court starts from a position of respecting a person’s autonomy, and the burden falls on whoever claims that capacity is missing.
Who Does the Act Protect?
The Act protects adults who wholly or partly lack the capacity to understand or communicate decisions about their own care or property.
This includes people affected by dementia, stroke, brain injury, intellectual disability, or serious mental illness.
The Family Court can step in for a person who can’t understand the nature and foresee the consequences of a decision about their personal care and welfare.
It can also step in where the person understands the decision but has wholly lost the ability to communicate it. The same kind of test applies to decisions about property and money.
The person must usually live in New Zealand and be 18 or older for most orders to be made. There’s an exception for some 16 and 17-year-olds who are, or have been, married, in a civil union, or in a de facto relationship.
The need for this protection is growing as the country ages. Stats NZ reported in June 2025 that around 900,000 people aged 65 and over were living in New Zealand, with that number likely to reach one million by 2029.
As the population ages, conditions like dementia become more common, and more families find themselves needing to understand how the Act works.
It’s worth clearing up a common myth here. Many people assume that if something happens to them, their spouse or adult children can automatically step in and make decisions.
That isn’t how the law works in New Zealand. Without an enduring power of attorney or a property manager or welfare guardian order, no one has an automatic legal right to make decisions for another adult, no matter how close the relationship.
What Are the Main Orders Under the Act?
The Act allows the Family Court to make two broad kinds of orders:
- personal orders, which include appointing a welfare guardian;and
- making property orders, which include appointing a property manager and making an order to administer property.
The right order depends on what decisions need to be made and the size of the person’s assets and income.
It helps to know that a property administrator and a property manager are appointed in different ways.
A property manager is appointed under a property order. A welfare guardian is appointed to make decisions about a person’s care and wellbeing. This covers where the person lives, their medical treatment, and other day-to-day welfare matters.
Only one welfare guardian can be appointed for a person, unless the court is satisfied that having more than one is in that person’s best interests.
A welfare guardian must be an individual aged 20 or over.
A property manager looks after a person’s money, assets, and income when their financial affairs are more substantial.
A property administrator does a similar job but for smaller estates, and they can only deal with the specific property listed in the order.
The difference between the two comes down to the value of the person’s assets and income, which I’ve set out below.
Property managers can be individuals or trustee corporations, and more than one can be appointed, in which case they usually share joint responsibility unless the court decides otherwise.
The choice between a property administrator and a property manager is set by financial thresholds, and these changed recently.
An Order to Administer Property suits people with lower assets and income, while a Property Manager Order covers larger or more complex estates with stricter oversight.
The table below compares the two property roles under the current rules.
| Feature | Property Administrator (Order to Administer Property) | Property Manager (Property Order) |
| Governing section | Section 11 of the PPPR Act | Section 31 of the PPPR Act |
| When it applies | Smaller estates within the income and asset thresholds | Larger or more complex estates above the thresholds |
| Income threshold (orders 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2027) | Annual income or benefit up to $41,200 | Used when income is above the threshold |
| Asset threshold | No single item of property worth more than $25,000 | Used when assets exceed $25,000 |
| Scope of authority | Only the specific property listed in the order | All of the person’s property, or a specified part |
| Reporting to the court | Fewer reporting duties; no annual financial statements required | Must file annual financial statements reviewed by Public Trust |
| Who can be appointed | One individual aged 20 or over | An individual or a trustee corporation; more than one allowed |
The financial thresholds shown here matter because they decide which role applies, and choosing the wrong one wastes time and money.
If the person’s income or any single asset goes above the limits, a property manager must be appointed rather than an administrator.
The administrator role carries lighter reporting duties, which is why it suits modest estates.
How Do You Apply For an Order under the Act?
You apply for an order by filing the right forms at the Family Court nearest to where the subject person lives, supported by a medical report confirming they lack capacity.
The court then appoints an independent lawyer to represent the subject person before making any decision.
The process usually starts with gathering evidence. A medical report from the person’s doctor is needed to confirm that they wholly or partly lack capacity.
You’ll also need details about the subject person, their assets and liabilities, and your relationship to them.
Bank statements showing account balances are often required as supporting evidence for property applications.
A wide range of people can apply, including relatives, attorneys,medical practitioners, social workers, and the person in charge of a care facility where the subject person lives.
Once the application is filed, the court appoints a lawyer for the subject person.
This lawyer meets with the person where possible, finds out their views, and reports back to the court on whether the orders being sought are appropriate.
This step is a key protection because it gives the vulnerable person an independent voice in the process.
Interested parties, such as close family members, must usually be notified so they have a chance to respond.
A judge will often decide a straightforward application without anyone needing to appear in court.
If family members disagree about the orders or who should be appointed, the court may hold a hearing.
At that hearing, the judge considers the medical evidence, any objections, and whether the proposed appointee is suitable.
Timeframes vary, but more straightforward cases can take a few weeks to a few months, while contested cases take longer.
Urgent situations are handled differently. If a decision can’t wait, you can file a “without notice” application for an interim order.
An interim welfare guardian order and an interim Order to Administer Property can each last up to six months, while a temporary property manager order can last up to three months, all while the full application is worked through.
A lawyer is still urgently appointed to report to the court before a judge considers making an interim order.
What Are Enduring Powers of Attorney Under the Act?
An enduring power of attorney (EPA)is a legal document under the PPPR Act that lets you choose someone to make decisions for you if you later lose mental capacity.
Unlike a court order, you set it up in advance while you still have capacity, so you stay in control of who is appointed.
The person who creates the EPA is called the donor, and the person they appoint is the attorney.
There are two types of EPA, matching the same personal and property split that runs through the rest of the Act.
A property EPA covers your money, property, and financial affairs. A personal care and welfare EPA covers your health, wellbeing, and matters like where you live.
The two types work differently in an important way.
A property EPA can be set up to take effect immediately while you still have capacity, or only once you lose it, depending on what you choose.
A personal care and welfare EPA only comes into effect once a relevant health practitioner certifies, or the court determines, that you’ve become mentally incapable.
You can appoint more than one attorney for property, but only one attorney at a time for personal care and welfare, though you can name successor attorneys.
The Act sets strict rules to make sure an EPA is valid and to guard against abuse.
The donor must receive independent legal advice from a lawyer or qualified legal executive before signing.
The signature must be witnessed by an authorised witness, and the attorney generally can’t use the same witness as the donor.
These safeguards exist because the EPA hands considerable power to another person, and the law treats that responsibility seriously.
An attorney’s paramount duty is to act in the donor’s best interests, not their own.
Having an EPA in place is far cheaper and simpler than a court application, and it means you, not a judge, decide who looks after you.
If you lose capacity without one, your family has to apply to the Family Court for orders, which takes time, costs money, and may result in someone you wouldn’t have chosen being appointed.
What Rules Must a Welfare Guardian or Manager Follow?
A welfare guardian or property manager must always act in the best interests of the subject person and follow the principles built into the Act.
The two guiding principles are to make the least restrictive intervention possible and to help the person use and develop whatever capacity they still have. These principles come straight from the Act itself.
For personal matters, the court’s primary objectives are to make the least restrictive intervention possible in the person’s life, given the degree of their incapacity, and to enable or encourage them to develop and use whatever capacity they have to the greatest extent possible.
The same approach applies to property matters, focused on the least restrictive intervention in managing the person’s affairs.
This means a decision-maker can’t simply take over everything; they must leave the person as much independence as is safely possible.
A welfare guardian must consult the subject person where they can, along with any property manager and other people involved in the person’s care.
They must encourage the person to act on their own behalf and develop their capacity where possible.
A welfare guardian who acts in bad faith, or without reasonable care, can be held personally liable for their actions.
Property managers carry heavier ongoing duties. A property manager must keep proper records and file annual financial statements with the court.
These statements are examined by Public Trust, which prepares a report for the court. Failing to file the required statements is a criminal offence, so the role isn’t one to take on lightly.
Orders under the Act aren’t permanent and are reviewed regularly. For a personal order or welfare guardian order, the court sets a review date no later than three years after the order is made, and after that first review, it may allow longer gaps of up to five years.
A property manager order works differently, with each review still set no later than three years after the order is made.
Orders can also be reviewed and brought to an end, for example, if the person regains capacity, and a property manager’s role stops on listed events such as the subject person’s death, the manager’s bankruptcy, or the court terminating the order.
The court can also step in where an attorney under an EPA is misusing their position, and it’s free to ask the Family Court to look into concerns about an attorney.
What Recent Changes Affect the Act?
The most significant recent change to the PPPR Act took effect on 3 October 2024, when the financial thresholds for property orders were lifted for the first time in decades.
These thresholds decide whether a family needs the simpler property administrator role or the more demanding property manager role.
Before the change, the limits were very low, which meant many families had to go through the full property manager process even for modest sums.
The asset threshold rose from $5,000 to $25,000, and the income threshold rose from $20,000 in stages.
For orders made between 1 April 2026 and 31 March 2027, the maximum annual income for an Order to Administer Property is $41,200. That figure keeps rising each year in stages until it reaches $45,000 from 1 April 2029.
The practical effect is that more families now qualify for the simpler administrator role, with its lighter reporting duties. That said, the costs for those who still need a property manager have gone up.
The change also reflects the pressure an ageing population is putting on the system.
Government papers behind the reform noted that increases in orders were linked to rising cases of dementia, and to care facilities and financial institutions often requiring an order before they’ll act.
For families, the message is to check which order applies to their situation, since some people who currently have a property manager order may now qualify for the simpler administrator role.
A bigger change may be on the horizon. On 29 January 2026, the Law Commission submitted its final report from its review of adult decision-making capacity law, and the report was presented to Parliament on 24 February 2026.
The report makes 175 recommendations and concludes that the Act should be repealed and replaced with a new Act that better respects the autonomy, will, and preferences of people with affected decision-making.
This isn’t a law change yet, and the current Act still applies in full, but it signals that the framework could be overhauled in the coming years, so it’s worth keeping an eye on.
It’s also worth knowing that the modern EPA framework was shaped by reforms in 2007 and 2008, which tightened the rules after concerns about attorneys misusing their powers. Those reforms introduced stronger witnessing requirements and a duty for attorneys to consult.
Plain-language EPA forms followed in 2017, making the documents easier to understand. These layers of reform show the law is regularly updated to balance protection with respect for people’s choices.
Get Help With the Act
The PPPR Act 1988 protects adults who can’t manage their own affairs by allowing the Family Court to appoint welfare guardians and property managers, and by setting the rules for enduring powers of attorney.
Putting an EPA in place while you still have capacity is the simplest way to stay in control of who makes decisions for you.
As PPPR Lawyers in Auckland, Evolution Lawyers can help you set up enduring powers of attorney or apply for orders under the PPPR Act.
Contact our team today to discuss your situation and protect yourself and the people you care about.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between an EPA and an order?
An enduring power of attorney is set up by you in advance while you still have capacity, letting you choose your own attorney. An order is made by the Family Court after you’ve already lost capacity, usually because no EPA was in place. The court chooses who is appointed, so you have far less control over the outcome.
Can my family automatically make decisions for me if I lose capacity?
No. In New Zealand, no one has an automatic legal right to make decisions for another adult, even a spouse or adult child. Without an enduring power of attorney or a PPPR court order, your family would need to apply to the Family Court before they could legally make personal or financial decisions on your behalf.
What is the difference between a property manager and a property administrator?
A property administrator handles smaller estates within set income and asset thresholds and has lighter reporting duties. A property manager handles larger or more complex estates, can manage all of a person’s property, and must file annual financial statements.The value of the person’s assets and income decides which role applies.
How long does an order last?
An order isn’t permanent. For a personal or welfare guardian order, the Family Court sets a review date no later than three years after the order is made, and after the first review it may allow gaps of up to five years. A property manager order is reviewed at least every three years. Orders can be reviewed and ended, for example if the person regains capacity.
Who can apply for an order in New Zealand?
A range of people can apply, including a relative or attorney of the person, their doctor, a social worker, or the person in charge of a care facility where they live. Other people can also apply with the court’s permission. The application is filed at the Family Court nearest to where the subject person lives.
Do welfare guardians control money and property?
No. A welfare guardian only makes decisions about personal care and welfare, such as medical treatment and living arrangements. Money and property are handled separately through a property manager or property administrator. A person may need both a welfare guardian and a property manager, but the two roles are kept distinct under the PPPR Act.