Suchergebnisse

This legal column includes discussion of a recently decided Court of Appeal case relevant to vulnerable adults and a review of Fair Access to Care Services, the guidance on eligibility criteria for adult social care.

Siblings sharing responsibility for parent care, and entitlement to parent assets, are sometimes dissatisfied with how their parents' estates are distributed following a period of care to the parent. Such dissatisfaction can be advanced through legal claims by some siblings that other siblings, during the course of giving care, exerted undue influence over the parent to obtain their assets. The Canadian legal doctrine of undue influence directs attention to what transpired between two parties in the interest of protecting vulnerable people from having to honor arrangements to which they did not truly consent. In these cases, the focus is on the relationship between a sibling as an adult child, and the now deceased care recipient parent. At the same time, these cases reflect expectations and dynamics among siblings relative to each other. In this paper, a family, rather than dyadic, perspective is employed to illuminate elements of undue influence claims that are relevant to the sibling experience of giving care and sharing assets. We thus expand on understandings of dyadic issues addressed by the courts.

PurposeThis paper aims to stimulate discussion on how best to protect individuals from undue influence when gifting to religious institutions in England and Wales.Design/methodology/approachThis paper is based on the law relating to undue influence in England and Wales and draws from the literature regarding gifting to religious institutions and accountability of such institutions.FindingsThis paper identifies that more needs to be done to protect individuals, so as to ensure they are gifting to religious institutions using their own free will. It highlights that although the law attempts to define undue influence, there is little guidance on where the line between persuasion and coercion lies. The paper recognises that religious institutions need to do more to adopt safeguarding policies and that the Charity Commission ought to better support such policies by creating a single point of reference.Practical implicationsSteps need to be taken to prepare a cohesive set of principles that religious institutions of all denominations can follow to ensure they protect themselves from being accused of undue influence, as well as safeguarding individuals from abuse.Originality/valueThere are limited studies that consider the dichotomy between religious gifting and undue influence. This paper adds to the existing discussion and considers ways in which individuals can be protected. The author is not aware of such considerations being directly contemplated as resolutions to this issue.