From Mental Health Law Online
In Part B of the instrument the donor appointed attorneys to act jointly and severally and struck out the words “with general authority to act”, leaving in place the words “with authority to do the following”. She did not include any instructions under those words to indicate the scope of the attorneys’ powers. On the application of the attorney for rectification of the instrument, the court was satisfied that it was the donor’s intention to confer general authority on the attorneys and that the deletion of those words was a clerical error. The court declared that the EPA was to be read and construed as if the donor granted general authority to the attorneys and directed the Public Guardian to reconsider the registration of the EPA in the light of the declaration. [OPG summary - EPA case.]
Note
The summary above is taken from the OPG website. It is listed under the heading "Rectification" as "Re Portues (an order made by District Judge S E Rogers on 6 January 2009)".
External link
Not on Bailii - there was no written judgment