By Ruth Mercer
The High Court has ruled that a woman seeking to leave wardship has capacity to make her own personal welfare decisions but requires decision-making support for her property and financial affairs.
The woman, identified only as T, has cerebral palsy and a mild learning disability. A consultant psychiatrist carried out a functional capacity assessment and found that she understood her care needs and could retain, weigh and communicate relevant information with assistance. However, the psychiatrist concluded that T needed a suitable co-decision-maker when dealing with larger sums of money and her financial affairs.
T consistently told those involved that she wanted her mother and sister, who have been committee of her person during wardship, to help manage her money.
In a ruling delivered on 10 March 2026, Mr Justice Mark Heslin said those wishes were important but could not resolve the appointment issue because concerns had been raised by the General Solicitor for Minors and Wards of Court, which manages T's estate.
Those concerns included payments allegedly made without court approval, difficulties vouching expenditure, uncertainty about who was living in properties owned by T, works allegedly carried out without court approval and family occupation of property from which T appeared to receive no income.
The judge stressed that he was making no findings of wrongdoing and accepted that T and her family had a loving and trusting relationship. However, viewed objectively, the number and nature of the financial issues created a conflict or potential conflict which meant family members could not presently act as co-decision-maker for her property and affairs. He also noted that T's assets were substantial and complex.
The court declared that T does not lack capacity for personal welfare decisions but does require support for property and affairs decisions. Because no suitable co-decision-maker was currently available, the judge asked the Decision Support Service to nominate a decision-making representative for financial matters only.
T was not formally discharged from wardship at this hearing; that step remains outstanding pending the appointment process.