OH v Craven



Judge: High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) (Norris J)

Citation: [2016] EWHC 3146 (QB)

Summary

This case is obligatory reading for anyone involved in a case where it is envisaged that there will be a personal injury exceeding £1m.

It involved one case where C was a minor who would have capacity on majority and one case where C was an adult who had had a litigation friend as evidence suggested he lacked litigation capacity but later evidence concluded he had capacity to manage his property and affairs.

In each case, there was an application that sums in excess of £2m should come out of the CFO and go into a PI trust where the trustee was linked to the litigation firm.

The judge held that this gave rise to an Etridge [2001] UKHL 44 situation of presumed undue influence and that the adult C and the minor C’s litigation friend should have or have the opportunity to have independent advice (at the litigation firm’s expense): see paras 30-32.

He also held that where the fund was over £3m consideration should be given to the appointment of an independent protector of the trust: see para 32.

Comment

The approach of the court, plainly, came as a surprise to the applicants’ legal advisers (see para 15). They had not anticipated the attentions of a Queen’s Bench judge. The ruling, logically, also applies wherever a large PI trust is envisaged even without any court involvement.

CategoryOther proceedings - Civil Date

Keywords


Sign up to our Mental Capacity Law Newsletter


    Before submitting this form please read and agree to our Privacy Notice. Form submissions will only be held for 24 hours, after which they will be automatically deleted.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Call +44 (0)20 7832 1111 for more information

Barrister portfolio

Close

Click the + icon next to any barrister to add their profile to this portfolio.

Barrister Call CV Email