The Public Guardian v CT & Anor

The Public Guardian v CT & Anor

The court found that, although the Public Guardian's conduct was not disproportionate or in breach of statutory duties, EY's conduct before and during proceedings was aggressive and disingenuous, resulting in unnecessary costs. Therefore, a departure from the general rule was justified: each party should bear their own costs, and the Public Guardian and EY are jointly liable for the expert's fee.

Parties
Applicant: The Public Guardian; First Respondent: CT; Second Respondent: EY
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Court of Protection Property and Affairs / Judgment on Application for Directions and Costs
Outcome
Application dismissed. No order as to costs except as to the expert's fee.
Legal Topics
Lasting Power of Attorney, Safeguarding, Capacity Assessment, Costs Orders, Conduct of Parties
Mental Capacity Court of Protection Costs Lasting Power of Attorney Safeguarding Capacity Assessment Costs Orders Conduct of Parties

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Public Guardian

Applicant

CT

First Respondent

EY

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Court of Protection Property and Affairs / Judgment on Application for Directions and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CT had capacity to manage his property and financial affairs and revoke or make an LPA
  2. 2 Whether the Public Guardian's application was justified
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded against the Public Guardian or the respondents

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, although the Public Guardian's conduct was not disproportionate or in breach of statutory duties, EY's conduct before and during proceedings was aggressive and disingenuous, resulting in unnecessary costs. Therefore, a departure from the general rule was justified: each party should bear their own costs, and the Public Guardian and EY are jointly liable for the expert's fee.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. No order as to costs except as to the expert's fee.

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • No order as to costs; each party to bear their own costs