View source for Re M Crook (2010) COP 16/7/10

''The donor's Health and Welfare LPA included an invalid restriction. A further defect was that she had not entered the date on which she executed Part A of the instrument in section 10, nor had she dated section 5 when selecting Option A. The Public Guardian does not regard a failure to execute the Options section as invalidating the instrument, but a failure to date Part A will normally do so. However, in this case the Public Guardian was prepared to infer that both sections had been executed on 13 October 2009, as Continuation Sheet A1 had been signed on that date, and so was the Part B certificate. In addition, the certificate provider had witnessed the Part A signatures. When applying for severance of the invalid restriction, the Public Guardian requested the court to direct that Part A was to be treated as having been signed on 13 October 2009, to avoid any challenges by third parties. The court accordingly included a provision in the order to the effect that sections 5 and 10 of Part A were to be treated as having been executed on 13 October 2009.'' [OPG summary - LPA case.]

==Note==
Summary from OPG website.

'''Title:''' Re M Crook (an order of the Senior Judge made on 16 July 2010)

'''Heading:''' Whether the instrument has been correctly executed

==External link==
{{#bailii:no tran}}

{{lpa-summary-link}}

[[Category:LPA cases - formalities]]

[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:No transcript]]
[[Category:2010 cases]]