header-logo header-logo

30 October 2014 / Elizabeth Carson
Issue: 7628 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Be mindful

carson

What steps should you take if you have concerns about a party’s capacity to enter into a negotiated agreement, asks Elizabeth Carson

A recent High Court case provides a useful reminder of practitioners’ obligations to the court when a party lacks capacity. MAP v RAP [2013] EWHC 4784 (Fam) concerned an application for permission to appeal a consent order where—among other reasons—the wife argued that she lacked capacity to enter into a compromise agreement with her husband, as she had been suffering from manic depression at the time the agreement was reached. The decision of Mr Justice Mostyn provides a helpful reminder of the steps that practitioners should take when they encounter a party who appears to lack capacity:

  • Practitioners must notify the court if they have concerns about a party’s capacity to conduct the proceedings (Practice Direction 15B, para 1.3);
  • The compromise of proceedings by a protected party is not valid unless approved by the court (CPR 21.10); and
  • An application can be made to a court of first instance to revoke or vary
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll