Re Lodge (2010) COP 6/8/10: Difference between revisions
m (Text replacement - "Category:EPA cases - valid execution" to "Category:EPA cases - formalities") |
m (Text replacement - "Category:EPA cases - all" to "") |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
[[Category:EPA cases - formalities]] | [[Category:EPA cases - formalities]] | ||
[[Category:Brief summary]] | [[Category:Brief summary]] | ||
[[Category:Transcript]] | [[Category:Transcript]] | ||
[[Category:2010 cases]] | [[Category:2010 cases]] | ||
[[Category:Judgment available on MHLO]] | [[Category:Judgment available on MHLO]] | ||
Latest revision as of 09:31, 1 May 2021
Unfortunately by mistake the donor signed Part C and the attorney signed Part B of the EPA instrument. On the attorney's application the Court held that the donor's failure to execute the instrument correctly was a material defect and it was not a valid EPA. The attorney applied for a reconsideration of this order. By an order of the Senior Judge made on 14/3/11 the previous order was affirmed. [OPG summary - EPA case - transcript available.]
Note
Summary from OPG section of Justice website.
Title: Re Lodge (an order of District Judge S E Rogers made on 6 August 2010)
Heading: Whether the instrument was validly executed
External link
No Bailii link (neutral citation is unknown or not applicable)
Summary on OPG section of Justice website .This is a link to an archived version of the web page (archived on 6/10/14).