The High Court has rejected a son’s objections to registering an enduring power of attorney made by his mother, finding that he had not proved she lacked capacity when she signed it or that her daughters were unsuitable or had used fraud or undue influence.
The judgment concerns an instrument executed by H.D. on 7 September 2020 appointing two of her daughters as attorneys. The daughters applied to register it under the Powers of Attorney Act 1996. H.D.’s son objected. The court heard evidence from the attorneys, the son, another daughter and the solicitor who advised H.D. on the instrument.
The son argued that medication for depression may have affected his mother’s capacity when she signed. The judge said the objection was not supported by medical evidence about the nature or effect of any adverse reaction. The solicitor said he had explained the instrument to H.D. and had no concerns about her capacity. A doctor at her usual practice saw her alone two days after signing and confirmed capacity in relation to the time of execution. The judge found the capacity objection had not been proved.
The son also challenged the daughters’ suitability, citing family conflict, the first daughter’s residence outside Ireland and concerns about the second daughter’s health and ability to withstand pressure. The judge found both suitable. She said the family hostility would not interfere with the administration of H.D.’s affairs, and that the evidence did not establish misconduct or mismanagement. She described the financial arrangements as muddled and said they should be made more transparent.
On the claim of fraud or undue pressure, the judge found no evidence that fraud had been used to induce H.D. to make the power. She considered evidence of arguments between H.D. and her eldest daughter, but found it did not establish undue influence. The solicitor’s evidence about H.D.’s understanding and character was described as compelling.
The court directed the attorneys to provide accounts to both notice parties by 31 January each year, starting on 31 January 2025, covering the previous calendar year. The accounts must list money received, contributions towards H.D.’s upkeep, expenses, and balances in accounts where she is a sole or joint account holder or otherwise beneficially entitled. The parties were given liberty to apply if the accounts are not provided as directed.
The judgment listed the matter for 22 February 2024 to address any outstanding issues, including costs. The judgment does not state the result of that later listing.