Judgment: 2026-03-23 · Court archive

High Court discharges woman from wardship and appoints niece and sister as decision-making representatives

High Court, Wards of Court · [2026] IEHC 246

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • S
  • T
  • U
  • Mr Justice Mark Heslin
What

High Court discharges woman from wardship and appoints niece and sister as decision-making representatives

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • High Court
  • Circuit Court
  • Decision Support Service
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The court formally discharged S from wardship and appointed her niece, T, and sister, U, as decision-making representatives, acting jointly and separately. Their authority covers all decisions falling within personal welfare and property and affairs because the medical assessment did not exclude any particular category of decision.

The High Court has discharged a woman identified as S from wardship and appointed her niece and sister to manage decisions concerning her welfare, property and financial affairs under the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act 2015.

In a ruling delivered on 23 March 2026, Mr Justice Mark Heslin declared that S lacks capacity to make decisions in relation to both her personal welfare and her property and affairs, even if assisted by a suitable co-decision-maker.

S, who was born in the 1940s, has a long history of mental health difficulties including schizophrenia and delusional beliefs and is now also living with dementia. She was admitted to wardship in 2022 and has since lived in residential care, where she depends on others for support.

A consultant psychiatrist carried out a functional capacity assessment and concluded that S lacked capacity across both areas of decision-making. That medical evidence was not disputed.

The court formally discharged S from wardship and appointed her niece, T, and sister, U, as decision-making representatives, acting jointly and separately. Their authority covers all decisions falling within personal welfare and property and affairs because the medical assessment did not exclude any particular category of decision.

The representatives were authorised to receive assets held for S by the Accountant of the Courts of Justice, receive her Civil Service occupational pension, investigate other financial accounts and protect her interest in property identified in the application. They must account to the Director of the Decision Support Service in relation to her property and affairs.

Because S's conditions are permanent, the court ordered that her capacity be reviewed by the Circuit Court within three years.

A reporting restriction prevents publication of material likely to identify S as having a medical condition. No order was made as to costs because a Legal Aid Certificate was in place.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review