FT, Re [2015] EWCOP 49 (29 July 2015)

FT, Re [2015] EWCOP 49 (29 July 2015)

The appointment of MA and PB as deputies for FT's property and affairs is affirmed because FT, when he had capacity, appointed them as executors in his will, indicating trust and competence. The applicants' challenge lacked merit, was not pursued diligently, and the deputies acted in FT's best interests. There is no justification to appoint all siblings or to extend the deputyship to personal welfare.

Citation
[2015] EWCOP 49
Parties
Applicant: DC; Applicant: TT; Applicant: ST; Respondent: MA; Respondent: PB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Court of Protection Property and Affairs Application / Application for Reconsideration of Deputyship Order
Outcome
Application for reconsideration dismissed; original deputyship order affirmed.
Legal Topics
Deputyship, Property and Financial Affairs, Best Interests, Costs in Court of Protection, Reconsideration of Order
Mental Capacity Law Court of Protection Deputyship Property and Financial Affairs Best Interests Costs in Court of Protection Reconsideration of Order

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DC

Applicant

TT

Applicant

ST

Applicant

MA

Respondent

PB

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Court of Protection Property and Affairs Application / Application for Reconsideration of Deputyship Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appointment of MA and PB as deputies for FT's property and affairs should be reconsidered
  2. 2 Whether all siblings should be appointed as deputies
  3. 3 Whether deputies should also be appointed for personal welfare

Ratio Decidendi

The appointment of MA and PB as deputies for FT's property and affairs is affirmed because FT, when he had capacity, appointed them as executors in his will, indicating trust and competence. The applicants' challenge lacked merit, was not pursued diligently, and the deputies acted in FT's best interests. There is no justification to appoint all siblings or to extend the deputyship to personal welfare.

Court Disposition

Application for reconsideration dismissed; original deputyship order affirmed.

Orders

  • MA and PB affirmed as joint and several deputies for FT's property and affairs.
  • Applicants (DC, ST, TT) to pay respondents' costs in equal shares, assessed on the standard basis.