Re Taylor (2012) MHLO 24 (EPA): Difference between revisions

m (Text replacement - "Not on Bailii - no transcript" to "{{#bailii:no tran}}")
Line 17: Line 17:
{{epa-summary-link}}
{{epa-summary-link}}


[[Category:EPA cases - severance of restrictions incompatible with a joint and several appointment]]
[[Category:EPA cases - severance of restrictions]]
[[Category:EPA cases - all]]
[[Category:EPA cases - all]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:No transcript]]
[[Category:No transcript]]
[[Category:2012 cases]]
[[Category:2012 cases]]

Revision as of 08:30, 1 May 2021

(1) In Re Dunningham: The donor appointed two attorneys, A and B, to act jointly and severally. She then imposed the following restriction: "and the said B shall have no authority to act on my behalf unless the said A has died or is incapable of acting as my Attorney". On the application of the attorneys for severance, the court severed the restriction as being inconsistent with a joint and several appointment. (2) In Re Taylor: on similar facts, the court severed the words 'jointly and severally'. [OPG summaries - EPA cases.]

Related judgments

Note

Summary from OPG section of Justice website.

Case title: Re Taylor (an order of District Judge Eldergill made on 7 December 2011)

Listed under heading: Severance of restrictions incompatible with a joint and several appointment

External link

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Summary on OPG section of Justice website .This is a link to an archived version of the web page (archived on 6/10/14).