Court of Protection finds three certificate-provider concerns were well-founded.
The Court of Protection has ordered the cancellation of six lasting powers of attorney after finding that the certificate provider, Robert Cornford, could not reasonably have considered himself competent to make the required certificate-provider judgments.
The decision was made by Her Honour Judge Hilder in AR & Ors, Re [2026] EWCOP 47 (T2), handed down on 30 September 2026. The proceedings concerned LPAs made by three donors, identified as AR, HR and MH under transparency orders.
The Public Guardian had brought applications seeking a determination of whether the LPAs were valid. The three cases were described as “test” cases, with a further 24 matters on hold pending their outcome. The common factor was that Cornford had acted as certificate provider for all six instruments.
Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the relevant regulations, a certificate provider must certify that the donor understands the purpose and scope of the LPA, that no fraud or undue pressure is being used, and that there is nothing else preventing the LPA from being created.
The court considered whether Cornford qualified to perform that role through his professional skills and expertise. Judge Hilder concluded that he did not.
The judgment considered, among other matters, Cornford’s previous conviction for fraudulent trading and his subsequent directorships while subject to a disqualification. The court also considered his training as a will writer and estate planner. The judgment records that his training evidence amounted to 33.5 hours of basic estate-planning and continuing professional development training between October 2019 and May 2023.
Judge Hilder concluded that a fraud conviction was incompatible with the safeguards expected from the certificate-provider role. The court also found that Cornford’s conduct in taking up company directorships during a period of disqualification further compounded the suitability concerns.
The court additionally found that Cornford had not demonstrated that he had properly satisfied himself about the matters he was required to certify. He had given what he described as “generic” answers and had kept no contemporaneous records of his discussions with the donors. The judge found that he had not explored with the donors their understanding of the purpose or scope of their LPAs in the way required.
The judgment also addressed the order in which an LPA must be executed. Under Regulation 9, the donor’s parts must be completed first, followed by the certificate provider and then the attorneys. The court found, on the balance of probabilities, that the six instruments had not been executed in the required order.
A further concern was the use of “Do Not Date” stickers. The judge concluded that the practice allowed signatures to be added in an order convenient to the parties rather than the legally required sequence, and that the six instruments therefore failed to comply with the execution requirements.
Judge Hilder concluded that all three concerns raised by the Public Guardian were well-founded. The certificates failed to meet the statutory requirements, the certificate provider had not properly satisfied himself of the matters he purported to certify, and the six LPAs had not been executed in accordance with Regulation 9. Their registrations must therefore be cancelled.
The judgment states that AR and HR, while they retain capacity, may execute new LPAs if they wish. It also directs that the appointment of MH’s daughters as property and affairs deputies should be remade on a final basis.