header-logo header-logo

20 September 2007 / Catherine Ball
Issue: 7289 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate , Mental health
printer mail-detail

Whose will?

Fee earners should be trained on the provisions of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, says Catherine Ball

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) sets up a legal framework that is designed to ensure that the affairs of those with mental incapacity are dealt with in the least interventionist way possible.

CODE OF PRACTICE

A Code of Practice produced by the government states that it is the duty of a person acting in any of the following roles to have regard to the code when dealing with someone who lacks capacity:- an attorney under an lasting power of attorney (LPA);
- a deputy appointed by the court;
- a person carrying out research in reliance on any provision under MCA 2005;
- an independent mental capacity advocate;
- a person in a professional capacity; or
- a person acting for remuneration.

Any lawyer dealing with someone who may not be able to make their own decisions must be aware of the code and MCA 2005—particularly if instructions are taken primarily from a third party. Departure from the code may be used

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: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
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
back-to-top-scroll