The Court of Protection has ruled that in order to manage direct payments (a form of public funding for care), a deputy appointed by the Court of Protection needs not only authority to manage P’s property and affairs, but also welfare authority.
The Court’s judgment in Re Various Applications in respect of ‘Direct Payments’ [2026] EWCOP 42 (T2) is important clarification and guidance in relation to four statutory schemes under which direct payments are made. This judgment removes any uncertainty as to the type of authority a deputy needs to manage direct payments, following the Court’s decision in the deputy removal case of Lumb v NHS Humber & North Yorkshire IBC [2024] EWCOP 57 (T2) . In addition, the judgment deals with a number of other issues including how a deputy can obtain authority to manage direct payments as deputy, the consequent entitlement to an indemnity, and also the steps a deputy who has managed direct payments without authority must take to obtain relief.
The decision has significant consequences for all professional deputies. In particular, trust corporation deputies will not be able to manage direct payments in their deputyship capacity, as a trust corporation cannot be given authority to make health and welfare decisions.
Georgia Bedworth appeared for the Official Solicitor who was appointed as amicus curiae.
The full judgment is available here
