Evesham And Pershore Housing Association Ltd v Werrett [2015] EWHC 1060 (QB) (20 April 2015)

Evesham And Pershore Housing Association Ltd v Werrett [2015] EWHC 1060 (QB) (20 April 2015)

The judge's previous order determining the defendant's capacity was a final order and could only be revisited in exceptional circumstances, which were not present. The evidence did not displace the statutory presumption of capacity; the judge was entitled to assess the expert evidence and was not wrong to conclude the defendant had capacity to litigate.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1060
Parties
Claimant and Respondent: Evesham and Pershore Housing Association Ltd; Defendant and Appellant: Timothy Werrett
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal With Appeal to Follow If Granted
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Litigation Capacity, Protected Party Status, Variation of Final Orders, Appointment of Litigation Friend
Civil Procedure Mental Capacity Litigation Capacity Protected Party Status Variation of Final Orders Appointment of Litigation Friend

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evesham and Pershore Housing Association Ltd

Claimant and Respondent

Timothy Werrett

Defendant and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal With Appeal to Follow If Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant lacked capacity to litigate and should be treated as a protected party under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and CPR Part 21
  2. 2 Whether the judge had power to vary or revoke a previous final order determining capacity
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in not adjourning for oral evidence or in allowing adversarial contest of capacity

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's previous order determining the defendant's capacity was a final order and could only be revisited in exceptional circumstances, which were not present. The evidence did not displace the statutory presumption of capacity; the judge was entitled to assess the expert evidence and was not wrong to conclude the defendant had capacity to litigate.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused.