HLA
[2014] QCAT 702
•5 December 2014
| CITATION: | HLA [2014] QCAT 702 |
| PARTIES: | HLA |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | GAA7317-12 |
| MATTER TYPE: | Guardianship and administration matters for adults |
| HEARING DATE: | 4 July 2014 |
| HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
| DECISION OF: | Acting Senior Member Endicott Member Morriss |
| DELIVERED ON: | 5 December 2014 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
| ORDERS MADE: | 1. HLA did not have capacity to execute the following enduring documents on 23 May 2012: a) Enduring power of attorney dated 23 May 2012 appointing HS as attorney for financial matters and HDO and HDT for personal matters b) Revocation of enduring power of attorney dated 23 May 2012 c) Enduring power of attorney dated 23 May 2012 appointing HDT and OP successively as attorneys for financial and personal matters. 2. HLA had capacity in relation to the following: a) Enduring power of attorney dated 1 February 2012 appointing HDT and OP as attorneys b) Deed of variation dated 1 February 2012 of the trust deed for the HLA Family Trust c) Company resolution removing HDO from a directorship of the corporate trustee G Pty Ltd dated 1 February 2012 d) Form 484 Change of Company details to record the cessation of HDO as a director of the company. G Pty Ltd dated 1 February 2012 e) Voting upon a company resolution passed by G Pty Ltd in relation to the distribution of income from the HLA Family Trust dated 1 February 2012. | ||
| CATCHWORDS: | GUARDIANSHIP – where an adult had made an Enduring Power of Attorney and had signed other documents of a complex legal nature – where medical evidence was contradictory whether the adult had capacity to make Enduring Power of Attorney - Capacity | ||
APPEARANCES:
| HLA: | Did not appear at the hearing |
| HS: | Represented by GR Dickson of Counsel instructed by McInnes Wilson Lawyers |
HDT: Represented by P R Cartledge, Solicitor
REASONS FOR DECISION
HLA is a ninety-five year old retired accountant living in his own home. HLA has three children, HS, HDO, and HDT. There is considerable conflict between HLA’s children regarding decision making and management of his financial affairs.
The Tribunal received an application from HS on 19 November 2011 proposing the Public Trustee as Administrator for HLA.
On 29 August 2012, the Tribunal appointed the Public Trustee as administrator and the Adult Guardian (now known as the Public Guardian) as guardian for HLA, for two years.
The Tribunal received an application from HS for a Declaration of Capacity, and this was considered 31 May 2013. The Tribunal made determinations regarding HLA’s capacity to execute various documents, including Enduring Powers of Attorney, Revocations of Enduring Powers of Attorney, and various other documents related to his assets and a discretionary trust.
HS and HDO appealed the decision and sought orders from the Tribunal. An Appeal hearing took place 10 March 2014 and the Tribunal made a decision to set aside the decision of 31 May 2013 about HLA’s capacity to execute documents. The application for a declaration about HLA’s capacity to execute documents was returned to the Tribunal for hearing. The Tribunal was to ensure, as far as is practicable, that the persons who were involved in the preparation of or witnessing of the relevant documents executed by HLA, including Ronald Plass and Russell Trevorrow, attend the hearing for the purpose of providing material or giving evidence.
The Tribunal considered the application for a declaration about HLA’s capacity to execute documents on 4 July 2014. At the beginning of the hearing the Tribunal clarified the specific documents of interest to parties and these included the documents executed 1 February 2012:
a) The Enduring Power of Attorney dated 1 February 2012 appointing HDT and OP as attorneys
b) Deed of Variation dated 1 February 2012 of the trust deed for the HLA Family Trust
c) Company resolution removing HDO from a directorship of the corporate trustee G Pty Ltd dated 1 February 2012
d) Form 484 Change of Company details to record the cessation of HDO as a director of the company G Pty Ltd dated 1 February 2012
e) Voting upon a company resolution passed by G Pty Ltd in relation to the distribution of income from the HLA Family Trust dated 1 February 2012.
A later submission from McInnes Wilson Lawyers of 18 July 2014 asked the Tribunal to consider HLA’s capacity to execute the following documents:
a) Enduring Power of Attorney dated 23 May 2012 appointing HS as attorney for financial matters and HDO and HDT for personal matters.
b) Revocation of enduring power of attorney dated 23 May 2012
c) Enduring power of attorney dated 23 May 2012 appointing HDT and OP successively as attorneys for financial and personal matters.
The Tribunal in making its decision considers the definition of capacity as defined in the Act[1] to mean the person is capable of:
a) Understanding the nature and effect of the matter; and
b) Freely and voluntarily making decisions about the matter; and
c) Communicating them in some way.
1Schedule 4 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 2000 (Qld).
An adult is presumed to have capacity for a matter. Capacity is specific to the matters in question.
Medical Reports and Evidence
Dr Clark (Consultant Physician) saw HLA on 15 August 2008 regarding a query of dementia. His report refers to reported short-term memory loss, poor hearing, and that he was driving and managing his share portfolio. Assessment using the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)[2] was 28/30. Dr Clark was not convinced HLA had Alzheimer’s disease.
[2]The MMSE (or Folstein test) is a brief 30-point questionnaire test that used to screen for cognitive impairment.
Dr Clark’s report of 8 June 2010 referred to behavioural problems, and that HLA had made bad financial decisions and he had memory problems. On the MMSE, he scored 23/30 suggesting Alzheimer’s disease.
Dr Clark’s report dated 18 June 2010 referred to a SPECT scan indicating a “large frontal cortex perfusion defect”. The scan was not typical of Alzheimer’s disease and it was possible he had had a large frontal cerebral infarct.
Dr Clark’s report dated 12 July 2010 referred to an MRI brain scan, which showed a “large area of encephalomalacia within the left frontal lobe in the anterior left middle cerebral artery territory”. Dr Clark referred to the infarct as “longstanding”.
Dr Clark reviewed HLA 16 July 2010 and referred to a “large left middle cerebral arterial stroke lesion”. He considered a trial of Aricept medication.
Dr Clark’s report 28 January 2011 indicated symptoms of poor appetite and weight loss. Dr Clark reported that HLA’s quality of life was reasonable for his various comorbidities. Dr Clark reported that HLA had Alzheimer’s Dementia, and despite Aricept, there was no great improvement in his short-term memory.
Dr Clark saw him for the last time on 1 April 2011 and his report indicated HLA was clinically unchanged and that the Aricept should be continued.
The Tribunal spoke to Dr Clark by telephone at the hearing. He indicated he had not seen HLA in person since 1 April 2011. At that time, HLA had moderate cognitive dysfunction, and was clinically unchanged from previous assessments.
Dr Clark referred to whether HLA had a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s dementia or multi-infarct dementia, but he did not believe HLA had Alzheimer’s dementia in 2010. He believed it was unlikely that HLA would have subsequently improved since he last saw HLA on 1 April 2011.
Dr Clark expressed surprise regarding the results of subsequent testing by HLA’s General Practitioner, Dr Haikerwal, on the MMSE in early 2012, but indicated that it could be a substantial response to Aricept, as some patients do improve dramatically.
Dr Bradley Ng (Consultant Psychiatrist) saw HLA for a Medico Legal Assessment on 1 February 2013. HLA’s score on MMSE score was 26/30. Dr Ng’s opinion was that HLA had Alzheimer’s Dementia, of mild severity and he would not have the capacity to live independently and safely on his own. He had a good routine and lots of support. Dr Ng had concerns about HLA’s failure in complex thinking and executive functioning and that he may be vulnerable to potential exploitation. Dr Ng indicated that HLA at that point lacked the full capacity to complete an Enduring Power of Attorney, but did have the capacity to complete a Will or change an existing Will. He could make some basic decisions and he had some partial capacity.
Dr Ng provided a further opinion 18 May 2014 based on his appointment in 2013, and documentation provided by McInnes Wilson, Lawyers. Dr Ng considered reports from Dr McCombe, Professor Morris, Dr Nick John, Dr E Subakumar. Dr Ng noted his assessment in May 2014 was retrospective, and he had little information about HLA’s cognitive and mental state at the time he signed documents on 1 February 2012. Dr Ng observed that independent assessments were done many months after 1 February 2012 and none can make a determination about whether HLA had or did not have capacity to complete an Enduring Power of Attorney or other documents on 1 February 2012. The timing of reports was “too distal” to the date in question. HLA’s MMSE and clinical presentation varied greatly over the different medical assessments. Dr Ng says there is a strong possibility HLA’s mental state may have fluctuated considerably during the course of 2012, including 1 February 2012, and ultimately reports can only highlight the strong possibility that HLA may have lacked the capacity on any particular day, including 1 February 2012. On the “balance of probabilities” HLA did not have capacity to execute documents in regards to his family trust or similar legal matters or an Enduring Power of Attorney on 1 February 2012.
Dr Donald McCombe (General Practitioner) provided a report dated 14 May 2014. Dr McCombe was HLA’s General Practitioner prior to 19 January 2011. His opinion is that HLA had considerable brain damage from a cerebrovascular accident (“stroke”) and was on treatment for Alzheimer’s. Testing on the St Louis University Mental Status Examination (SLUMS)[3] resulted in a score of 12/30 and HLA would be regarded as suffering from moderate to severe dementia. Symptoms of impaired capacity included loss of memory for recent events, less concerned with other’s activities, difficulty grasping new ideas, difficulty adapting to change, repeating himself, losing articles and getting lost when driving, significant changes in behaviour.
[3]The SLUMS was developed as an alternative to the MMSE for basic screening of dementia.
Dr McCombe provided a further opinion dated 13 December 2012. He indicated he had been HLA’s General Practitioner for 25 years but had last seen him on 19 January 2011. Dr McCombe indicated that HLA had a lack of insight and obdurate attitude combined with significant memory loss. He had no impairment in receptive or expressive communication. He was able to make decisions freely and voluntarily and was not influenced positively or negatively by others. HLA could make simple but not complex decisions in regards to personal, health, lifestyle, and financial matters.
An Occupational Therapy Driving Assessment was completed by Jode Lowe on 21 March 2012 and 28 March 2012. Cognitive assessment results indicated HLA might have significant difficulty with cognitive aspects of driving. He had impairments in short term recall, planning and problem solving. He required a high level of prompting and direction to comprehend and complete the cognitive assessments. He demonstrated poor attention to detail and significantly slowed information processing. HLA’s understanding and application of road law was poor and his understanding of safe driving procedures was very basic. His level of insight into his poor performance was limited.
Information was available from Dr Sonu Haikerwal, who was HLA’s treating General Practitioner from early 2011 to May 2012. She was HLA’s General Practitioner when he executed documents on 1 February 2012. Dr Haikerwal saw HLA 31 January 2012, and provided a written opinion that he was of sound mind and held sufficient testamentary capacity to provide instructions to make a new will and Power of Attorney. Dr Haikerwal spoke to the Tribunal and indicated that on assessment, HLA’s MMSE was 26/30, indicating no significant impairment. The letter with her opinion was provided to Mr Plass, Solicitor. In Progress notes dated 29 March 2012, HLA’s MMSE score was 27 and indicating no significant cognitive impairment. The MMSE on 18 April 2012 was 23/30 indicating mild cognitive impairments.
Dr Haikerwal informed the Tribunal that she had seen HLA for general health issues on multiple occasions from 2011 to 2012 (approximately 27 separate times). She had no concerns about HLA’s capacity to provide consent for medical procedures and treatment, including minor surgery.
Dr Haikerwal had no doubt about HLA’s capacity to execute legal documents, as there were no significant cognitive impairments evident. HLA was receiving Aricept, and was stable and well controlled on medication.
In information provided to the Adult Guardian 18 April 2012, Dr Haikerwal indicated that HLA had dementia, he had recently failed the Occupational Therapy Driving assessment, and he had a score of 23/30 on the MMSE indicating mild cognitive impairment.
Dr Nick John (Consultant Physician and Geriatrician) saw HLA for a capacity assessment with his son HS and daughter HDO on 18 July 2012 and 27 July 2012. Dr John reports that HLA’s MMSE score was 19/30 with the normal for a man of his age and educational achievement above 24/30. His medical history included a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Disease, reflux esophagitis, anxiety, allergic rhinitis, post-herpetic neuralgia, anaemia, osteoarthritis, atrial fibrillation, gout, congestive cardiac failure, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, impaired glucose tolerance and large middle cerebral artery infarct in 1998. Dr John’s opinion was that HLA lacked capacity to make complex decisions, both financial and lifestyle choices. Dr John’s opinion was that it was impossible to say definitively that he lacked capacity when altering his Will and Power of Attorney but given the extent of his frontal lobe dysfunction and the chronicity of his dementia it is highly probable he would have lack the necessary capacity at the end of 2011 and early 2012.
Professor Phillip Morris (Consultant Psychiatrist) provided a report after examination of HLA 4 June 2012. He did not have access to HLA’s medical history. He completed an interview and a Mental Status Examination. HLA scored 25/30 on the MMSE. His opinion was that HLA had cognitive impairment, mainly of an amnestic type, and might reflect an early underlying dementia. In Professor Morris’s opinion, HLA had the capacity to make decisions about his living conditions, including the people who he would like to live with. He had capacity to make decisions about his basic health care, food, shopping and purchasing. There was fighting and conflict between HLA’s children and HLA had found it difficult living with them. HLA did not have capacity to make an Enduring Power of Attorney – he had little idea about what it is for and could not describe what was required in making the decision or what the roles of the Enduring Power of Attorney would be. HLA had capacity to make a Will. He was aware of his considerable assets, and knew his children and grandchildren would have a claim on his estate when he died.
Professor Morris provided a further opinion dated 18 May 2014. He considered his own report and various reports and documents, but did not examine HLA. His opinion was that HLA was cognitively impaired and had limited insight into the memory disturbances he demonstrated when assessed on 4 June 2012. He scored 25/30 on the MMSE. He did not consider he retained capacity to execute an Enduring Power of Attorney. He did not consider he had capacity to make complex financial decisions. It is unlikely the clinical condition of HLA assessed on 6 June 2012 would have differed from 1 February 2012. It is “very likely” that HLA lacked capacity to execute the EPOA and other documents of 1 February 2012. He is likely to have been susceptible to undue influence or exploitation at that time. It remains possible (but not likely) that he was capable of executing the documents on 1 February 2012 because none of the medical observers examined him specifically on that date.
Dr Ganesmoorthy Subakumar (Physician, Aged Care Gold Coast Health Service) assessed HLA on 2 August 2012. He refers to a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s Dementia. A MMSE assessment resulted in score of 22/30 and a Rowland Universal Dementia Scale (RUDAS) score of 22/30. HLA was continuing with Aricept for Alzheimer’s dementia, and had memory problems. HLA vaguely remembered papers signed in February 2012 in regard to Will, Enduring Power of Attorney and other financial matters but could not tell in detail what they were for. He was inconsistent with what an Enduring Power of Attorney is and whom he appointed. He had memory loss. HLA was still able to make simple financial decisions and day-to-living arrangements and decisions. HLA lacks capacity to make decisions regarding complex financial management, investment decisions and complex paperwork of legal importance. It is not possible to give an opinion on his capacity or mental status when he signed papers on 1 February 2012, as mental status can fluctuate or vary in Alzheimer’s dementia depending on health status (such as depending on whether he has any illness, delirium or medication effects).
The Tribunal spoke with Mr Ron Plass, Solicitor from Paramount Legal. He saw HLA on referral from Russell Trevorrow, Accountant.
a) He took instructions directly from HLA in respect of preparation of legal documents, including an Enduring Power of Attorney and various company documents. He also took instructions for a Will from HLA solely.
b) He obtained information from HDT specific to names, dates of birth and contact details, such as phone numbers, addresses etc., but HDT was not present when he took instructions from HLA.
c) Mr Plass provided a faxed copy of his diary instructions for 31 January 2012, which appear to indicate discussion with HLA regarding his wishes regarding an Enduring Power of Attorney appointing HDT and OP. There are references to a Will and advice to HLA that his Will might be challenged. There appeared to be reference to HLA’s wishes for his grandchildren and details about what should happen if the Will is challenged. There are references to variation to the Trust. He spent approximately 90 minutes with HLA.
d) Mr Plass was aware of a previous Enduring Power of Attorney appointing HDT solely, and the new Enduring Power of Attorney was not significantly different, including OP.
e) HLA provided him with documents from his filing cabinet and knew where they were.
f) He recalled detailed discussion with HLA regarding the preparation of documents, and his file notes support this, although he did not have specific recollection of the exact questions he would have asked. HLA presented as intelligent and spritely and was very aware of his surroundings, current events, and his recent activities. He was able to give detailed information regarding his finances, including assets, shares and investments. In Mr Plass’s opinion, HLA was aware, cognizant of his financial affairs, and able to provide detailed instructions regarding the preparation of his legal documents.
g) Mr Plass did not enquire regarding HLA’s medical conditions, but did obtain medical information from HLA’s General Practitioner Dr Haikerwal regarding his capacity. He was satisfied that HLA had capacity to give instructions and to execute the legal documents.
The Tribunal also spoke to Mr Russell Trevorrow, Accountant. He assisted HLA in preparation of Tax returns that were overdue. He saw HLA at his home and assisted him to obtain records from various banks (driving him to locations). In his opinion:
a) HLA was aware of the need to complete his tax returns and they were 95% complete. His records were in exceptionally good order, although some documents were missing. He had provided very detailed drafts that were in his own writing, which indicated a good understanding of his finances.
b) He took instructions from HLA alone and no one else.
c) He was satisfied at all times that HLA was aware of what he was doing and had no concerns about his understanding.
d) He was extremely impressed with HLA’s detailed understanding of his finances and investments, and they had discussions for example about his share portfolios, including when and how many shares were purchased, and why he purchased them etc.
The Tribunal spoke briefly to Mr Neall and Mrs Neall friends of HDT and HLA. Mr and Mrs Neall were visiting HLA 31 January 2012 and 1 February 2012 when various documents were signed. They were in his home when the Solicitor and Accountant were there, but were not involved and sat outside with HDT. Mr and Mrs Neall have known HLA for over 23 years, visiting him several times each year. He appeared the same as always and alert mentally regarding business affairs. Mrs Neall indicated that HLA had spoken with her about his family circumstances and he was “very upset”. His only problem was his hearing. Mr Neall was also aware HLA was changing his Will and adjusting his affairs, which were “his business”.
The Tribunal received submissions from Mr Dickson, Counsel on behalf of HS and HDO, on 18 July 2014.
Mr Dickson submitted that the medical evidence is sufficient to rebut the presumption of capacity on the “balance of probabilities” and that HLA lacked capacity on 1 February 2012 to sign the enduring power of attorney and other documents. Mr Dickson also submitted that the evidence of Mr Plass and Mr Trevorrow should not be relied on, as they did not undertake any assessment of HLA’s capacity. The evidence of Mrs Neall has no weight as it is contradicted by Mr Neall’s evidence. The submissions of HDT that HLA had capacity on 1 February 2012 are contrary to statements made by her in letters dated 20 August 2010 and 21 November 2011.
The Tribunal received submissions from Mr Cartledge, Solicitor for HDT:
a) The Tribunal should consider the medical reports produced at various times prior to and subsequent to the 1 February 2012 when HLA executed various documents.
b) The progress notes and reports or Dr Haikerwal are important as she was HLA’s GP at the time and in the previous 12 months, when she could observe HLA.
c) Dr John and Dr Subakumar were of the view it was impossible to say definitively that he lacked capacity when altering his Will and Power of Attorney.
d) The Tribunal cannot be satisfied the evidence rebuts the presumption of capacity “on the balance of probabilities”. Dr Haikerwal had no concerns about HLA’s capacity to provide consent for medical procedures and treatment, including minor surgery.
Discussion of the Evidence
The Tribunal’s task is to determine HLA’s capacity to make decisions regarding his financial affairs, specifically to execute documents such as a Will, an Enduring Power of Attorney and various other legal documents regarding his finances, on various dates. These are all complex documents.
In order to find any impairment of decision making capacity, the Tribunal must be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the presumption of capacity has been rebutted by the evidence. The medical and other evidence about HLA’s capacity is varied and sometimes contradictory.
The Tribunal accepts that all of the medical witnesses who had examined HLA on or after 18 April 2012 were of the opinion that HLA exhibited at least mild cognitive impairment by April 2012. Expert medical evidence from Professor Morris, Dr John, Dr Subakumar and Dr Ng went further and considered HLA lacked capacity for complex matters when he was assessed in June, 2012 (Professor Morris), July 2012 (Dr John), August 2012 (Dr Subakumar), and February 2013 (Dr Ng). All were of the view however, even as late as February 2013, that HLA still retained capacity to make simple personal and financial decisions.
In respect of documents executed on 1 February 2012, there are conflicting views. The views of Dr McCombe (General Practitioner) were considered by the Tribunal. He had not seen HLA since early 2011, and did not examine him at any time in the months before or after documents were executed 1 February 2012. The Tribunal considers his views are based on information that was gained at times too distant to the date in question and therefore of limited value in determining HLA’s capacity on that date.
The views of Dr Clark were also considered by the Tribunal. However, as Dr Clark had not seen HLA since April 2011, and did not examine him at any time in the months before the documents were executed on 1 February 2012 or subsequently, the Tribunal does not place significant weight on his views about capacity at that time. Dr Clark did not reject the possibility that HLA’s cognitive functioning may have improved with medication.
Dr Johns, Professor Morris and Dr Ng can only speculate about HLA’s capacity on 1 February 2012, as they did not see him at that time. Further, Dr Ng in his report of 18 May 2014, highlights that the timing of various reports is “too distal” to the date in question (1 February, 2012) and that there is a strong possibility that HLA’s clinical presentation may have varied greatly over different medical assessments during 2012, including 1 February 2012. Dr Subakumar indicated it was not possible to give an opinion on HLA’s capacity or mental status when he signed papers on 1 February 2012, as mental status can fluctuate or vary depending on health status. Dr John was of the view that it was impossible to say definitively HLA lacked capacity. Professor Morris concedes it was “possible” he had capacity but “very likely” he lacked capacity.
One of the few medical practitioners to actually see HLA close to 1 February 2012, was Dr Haikerwal, HLA’s General Practitioner. Dr Haikerwal was satisfied that HLA had testamentary capacity on 31 January 2012 and provided a written opinion at that time. She saw him subsequently on 29 March 2012, and HLA had no significant cognitive impairment. The Tribunal places significant weight on the views of Dr Haikerwal, as she was HLA’s treating General Practitioner who saw him very regularly; indeed, she saw HLA the day before he executed documents and subsequently.
Evidence in close proximity to 1 February 2012 is that of Mr Plass (Solicitor) in respect of HLA’s capacity to execute an Enduring Power of Attorney and Will, and various other legal documents and of Mr Trevorrow (Accountant), who assisted HLA with preparation of Tax returns. Both Mr Plass and Mr Trevorrow indicated that they took instructions from HLA solely, that he was intelligent, spritely, with very detailed knowledge regarding his financial affairs, and expressed his instructions very clearly to them. Both Mr Plass and Mr Trevorrow were satisfied at all times that HLA had capacity to provide instructions regarding his financial matters.
In respect of the instructions provided to Mr Plass and Mr Trevorrow, the Tribunal takes into consideration HLA’s long history as an accountant, and his considerable years of experience in management of his own complex finances (including his share portfolio and investments, and the HLA Family Trust and G Pty Ltd), and dealing with other legal documents. The evidence given by Mr Plass and Mr Trevorrow about HLA’s capacity was reasonably based on their direct observations of HLA on 1 February 2012 and on the knowledge that Dr Haikerwal had very recently assessed that HLA had capacity to make an Enduring Power of Attorney.
Mr and Mrs Neall, who were friends of HDT and HLA, also saw HLA at the time documents were signed 1 February 2012, and indicated that he appeared mentally alert and the same as always.
HLA has a medical history that includes a brain injury from a cerebrovascular accident, a diagnosis of dementia and cognitive impairments. He also has a range of other health conditions requiring management. He has required increasing care from family members, and from paid carers to continue to live in his own home. However, this history and a diagnosis of dementia are not sufficient to rebut the presumption of capacity.
HLA’s mental status and cognitive impairments have fluctuated over time, but the tribunal is satisfied that he continued to retain capacity for simple personal and financial matters as recently as February 2013.
The Tribunal prefers the evidence from Dr Haikerwal, Mr Plass and Mr Trevorrow, who all saw HLA at the time he executed documents on 1 February 2012, and who were all confident in their view that he had capacity. The evidence from some other medical practitioners, because of the distal nature of the assessments, and the doubt acknowledged in their opinions, is not sufficient to rebut the presumption that HLA had capacity to execute documents 1 February 2012.
The tribunal concludes that HLA had capacity to make an Enduring Power of Attorney on 1 February 2012 and to sign the other documents on that day. The tribunal however concludes that the evidence from the medical witnesses is compelling that by April 2012 HLA lacked capacity for complex decision-making. Documents signed on 23 May 2012 would not be valid as HLA had by then impaired decision-making capacity for complex financial and legal matters.
0
0
0