​The court had to determine i) whether the P had the capacity to marry, to make a will and to enter into a prenuptial agreement; and 2) whether he should be told about the amount of his estate. The court ruled that all applications should succeed.

The P has an acquired brain injury as a result of a deliberate injection of insulin by his father when he was 12 months old. He was now in a relationship with his fiancee and wished to marry her, enter into a prenuptial agreement and be told the value of his estate (which was substantial as he had received a compensation award from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority in respect of his injuries). The Deputy did not agree that he should be told about the extent of his estate. 

The court agreed that the P had capacity to marry, make a will, enter into a prenuptial agreement and be told the value of his estate. The reasons for the decision about the value of his estate were, amongst others:

1. The prenuptial agreement would be less effective without the information. There was a risk that failure to provide the information would deprive the P of an opportunity to protect his assets in the event of marital breakdown.
2. The P had expressed the clearest desire to enter into a prenuptial agreement and to make a will. His ability to effect these would be greatly enhanced by knowing about the extent of his assets.
3. The existence of the Deputyship has been an effective safeguard against financial abuse.

Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii

​Application by the CCG which proposed an extensive package of care for the P at the family home, with (most of) the financial arrangements managed by a third party broker. The application was  granted despite it being opposed by the P's parents.

The P's parents, who looked after him at home, were being paid almost £5,000 per week by the CCG. This money was to pay themselves as well as to fund other carers. The parents invoiced the CCG directly. The CCG wished to fund a package of care for the P which was on the same basis as he receives at present in terms of quantity of care from carers, but which also includes services directly commissioned by the CCG by way of Occupational, Speech and Behavioural therapy. They wished to provide the monies for the carers and to have care management oversight by the use of a brokerage organisation to deliver the Personal Health Budget and so made an application to the court.

The court granted the application. Mechanisms of transparency and governance are obviously reasonable expectations of the CCG, irrespective of the P's parents' personal administrative skills. It was unarguable that public funds not far short of £5,000 per week should be administered in any way other than on an open, transparent and impartial basis; and that is not the case if the P's parents both managed such funds and used a large part of it to pay themselves, without any system of oversight. It was right and proper that such expenditure should be transparent, traceable and demonstrably well-founded. The CCG's unwillingness to continue financial arrangements which were adopted as an interim response to a crisis situation was entirely understandable.

Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii

Costs were awarded against the LA after a dispute in which the LA alleged the mother had mismanaged the P's funds.

Application by the P's son to receive authority from the court to make gifts from the P's estate in the sum of £7m.  The authorisation was granted.

Application against various costs orders made against the applicant  in relation to the P, his late aunt. The application was dismissed.

Application by P's son for retrospective approval of gifts of money paid from P's accounts to or for the benefit of the Applicant. Approval was given for a portion of the sum paid.

The Applicant, who holds an EPA and LPA for heath and welfare, withdrew funds totalling over £88,000 from the bank accounts. He was applying for retrospective approval for these withdrawals, while his estranged brother was against the approval being given.

The Court approved a total of just over £72,000.

​Read the full text of the judgment on Bailii

​​Application for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 granting retrospective ratification of a gift of £324,000 from the Patient, being a potentially exempt transfer for the purposes of inheritance tax (IHT). The application was refused.

​Application for the revocation of both LPAs after the attorneys used the Patient's money to buy a property. The LPA PA was revoked, the LPA HW was not.

​​Case in which the court had to decide who was reponsible for costs incurred as a result of the successful application by the PG to have the attorneys' LPA for property and financial affairs revoked. The attorneys were ordered to share their own costs.

​Appeal against the making of a statutory will which divided the Patient's estate between the two sons in the ratio 25:75. The appeal was allowed.