FT, Re

FT, Re

FT lacks capacity to manage his property and affairs due to dementia. The appointment of MA and PB as deputies is affirmed because FT, when he had capacity, appointed them as executors in his will, indicating trust and competence. The applicants' conduct and lack of merit in their application justify an order for costs against them.

Parties
Applicant: DC; Applicant: TT; Applicant: ST; Respondent: MA; Respondent: PB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Reconsideration of Deputyship Order / Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed; deputyship order affirmed
Legal Topics
Appointment of Deputy, Best Interests, Property and Affairs, Personal Welfare, Costs, Statutory Will

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

Parties

DC

Applicant

TT

Applicant

ST

Applicant

MA

Respondent

PB

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Reconsideration of Deputyship Order / Judgment

  1. 1 whether the deputyship order appointing MA and PB should be reconsidered
  2. 2 whether all siblings should be appointed as deputies
  3. 3 whether personal welfare deputyship is required

Ratio Decidendi

FT lacks capacity to manage his property and affairs due to dementia. The appointment of MA and PB as deputies is affirmed because FT, when he had capacity, appointed them as executors in his will, indicating trust and competence. The applicants' conduct and lack of merit in their application justify an order for costs against them.

Court Disposition

application dismissed; deputyship order affirmed

Orders

  • MA and PB affirmed as deputies for property and affairs
  • Costs to be assessed on the standard basis and paid by DC, ST, and TT in equal shares