header-logo header-logo

20 February 2026 / Ann Stanyer
Issue: 8150 / Categories: Features , Court of Protection , Profession , Mental health , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Is your LPA gathering dust?

242969
Lasting powers of attorney & letters of wishes should evolve with a client’s life. Regular reviews can prevent family disputes, court intervention & costly mistakes, writes Ann Stanyer
  • Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) should be reviewed at least every five years—and after any major life event—to ensure attorneys remain appropriate and arrangements still reflect the client’s wishes.
  • Thoughtful selection of attorneys, clear restrictions within the LPA, and a well-drafted letter of wishes can prevent misunderstandings, misuse of powers and costly Court of Protection disputes.
  • Proactive conversations about care, finances and decision-making reduce the risk of family conflict and court intervention if capacity is lost.

As 2026 gets underway, now is the time to review important documents, including powers of attorney. After spending time with close family and friends, many clients may be considering how best to plan for their future or whether any changes are needed to existing arrangements.

Recent cases in the Court of Protection illustrate the problems that all too often arise where

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

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

Financial services and regulatory offering boosted by partner hires

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll