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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll