Re Smith  MHLO 63 (LPA)
The donor appointed two attorneys to act jointly and severally. The LPA was registered by oversight even though one attorney's signature had not been witnessed. The attorney applied for a declaration of validity, and the evidence was that the witness had been present when the attorney signed, but had not signed under the attorney's name. The court dismissed the application, holding that it had no jurisdiction to declare that the LPA was valid. The applicant was directed to return the instrument to the OPG so that his appointment could be marked as invalid in accordance with section 10(7) of the MCA 2005. [OPG summary - LPA case.]
Summary from OPG section of Justice website.
Case title: Re Smith (an order of the Senior Judge made on 1 March 2012)
Listed under heading: Whether the instrument has been correctly executed
No Bailii link (no transcript)
Summary on OPG section of Justice website†. This is a link to an archived version of the web page (archived on 6/10/14).