Re Wormsley (2011) COP 24/10/11: Difference between revisions
m (Text replacement - "Category:severance of restrictions" to "Category:LPA cases - severance of restrictions") |
m (Text replacement - "Category:LPA cases - all" to "") |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
{{lpa-summary-link}} | {{lpa-summary-link}} | ||
[[Category:LPA cases - severance of restrictions]] | [[Category:LPA cases - severance of restrictions]] | ||
[[Category:Brief summary]] | [[Category:Brief summary]] | ||
[[Category:No transcript]] | [[Category:No transcript]] | ||
[[Category:2011 cases]] | [[Category:2011 cases]] | ||
Latest revision as of 07:58, 2 May 2021
The donor appointed two primary attorneys and two replacement attorneys, and directed them to act jointly and severally. He further directed as follows: "If a replacement attorney is required to replace an original attorney, the two replacement attorneys shall decide which one of them shall serve as attorney." On the application of the Public Guardian the court severed the provision as being inconsistent with the joint and several appointment of the replacement attorneys. [OPG summary - LPA case.]
Note
Summary from OPG section of Justice website.
Title: Re Wormsley (an order of the Senior Judge made on 24 October 2011)
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 This is a link to an archived version of the web page (archived on 6/10/14).