(b) Mr Justice Boreham's decision in personal injury proceedings in the Queen's Bench Division in White v Fell , on 12 November 1987, in which he held that the meaning of the expression "incapable of managing his property and affairs" should be construed in a common sense way as a whole. Few people have the capacity to manage all their affairs unaided, and whether they are capable of managing their property and affairs depends on whether they are capable of taking, considering, and acting upon appropriate advice.
The evidence in this case shows that:
(b) He has the ability to make best interests decisions on Fahmida's behalf, and has been doing so since she ceased to be capable of making decisions for herself in respect of her property and financial affairs.
(c) He understands what acting as a deputy entails and is aware of not only his powers but also the limitations on his powers, and the range of duties and responsibilities he will be taking on. The Court of Protection Visitor took pains to show him the forms he would need to complete and to inform him of the duties and responsibilities described in the Mental Capacity Act Code of Practice.
(d) He has insight and understanding of the fact that he has a problem in respect of which he needs assistance from time to time.
(e) He has the ability to instruct an appropriate adviser (for example, his niece, Adeela, for routine matters, and Shamim Ali and the members of her team at Addison Khan Solicitors for technical matters of a legal nature) with sufficient clarity to enable them to understand the issues and to support or advise him appropriately.
(f) He also has the ability to understand and make decisions based upon such advice as he may receive. He demonstrated this at the hearing by making concessions on issues that that would otherwise have been a stumbling block in his future relationship with Fahmida's children.
(g) He has suitable arrangements in place to enable him to fulfil his obligations in terms of interfacing with third parties, record-keeping, and reporting to the Public Guardian.
(h) By excluding any dealings with Fahmida's house from the scope of his authority, there will be relatively little left for him to manage and administer and certainly nothing of monumental complexity or importance.
The court's function is, wherever possible, to empower rather than disenfranchise and, in my view, it would be preferable to allow Abdul to receive support in carrying out his functions as deputy in a way that is proportionate to his needs, rather than refuse to appoint him. In this case, it is unlikely that someone with first-rate literacy skills would prove to be a better deputy than Fahmida's devoted husband.
I am satisfied, therefore, that it would be in Fahmida's best interests to appoint Abdul to be her deputy for property and affairs, and that this course of action is less restrictive than any alternative.