Respondents failed to discharge onus to show that proposed attorneys were unsuitable

Enduring powers of attorney – conflict between 5 siblings – 2 siblings are the proposed attorneys, one more is supportive, two resist the application - decision to sell shares of the donor to fund works in the house in which the donor has a right to reside - notices of objection were lodged out of time - onus is on the objectors - the decision complained of was one by the donor and not the attorneys - assessment of witnesses – Court rejects the evidence of the respondents - family hostility is not a basis for a finding of unsuitability - any missteps on the part of the attorneys do not amount to unsuitability within the meaning of the legislation - any errors or missteps by the attorneys come under the heading of mismanagement but not misconduct – acquiescence - objectors wrote an expressly open letter accepting one of the attorneys subject to their suggestion that she should act jointly with one of the objectors – not permissible construction - medical evidence favours the donor remaining in her present care arrangements – enduring powers of attorney ordered to be registered - consequential orders – directions – costs of legal proceedings - general rule that costs follow the event must apply here – Calderbank letter - discretionary circumstances – if the hearing was limited to the issues on which the respondent made some headway - discount the costs in favour of the applicants by one-seventh –