header-logo header-logo

04 July 2013
Issue: 7567 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Capacity to bring litigation

Loughlin v Singh and others [2013] EWHC 1641 (QB), [2013] All ER (D) 219 (Jun)

It was an established principle that, to have capacity, the claimant required: (i) the insight and understanding of the fact that he had a problem in respect of which he needed advice; (ii) having identified the problem, it would be necessary for him to seek an appropriate adviser and to instruct him with sufficient clarity to enable him to understand the problem, and to advise him appropriately; and (iii) sufficient mental capacity to understand and to make decisions based upon or otherwise give effect to such advice as he might receive. Further, if the claimant was vulnerable to exploitation or was prone to make rash or irresponsible decisions, he did not necessarily lack capacity. However, the court, in reaching its conclusion, might take such matters into account. In determining capacity, the court had to consider the individual claimant and the particular context, including the fact that the claimant would have control of a substantial fund.

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll