Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you for having me.

The Law Society and the academic lawyer, Yvonne Evans, have suggested that, in view of Scotland’s increasing emphasis on net zero goals, sections 16 and 17 could be amended in relation to trustees’ powers of investment. The bill could be amended to allow trusts to adopt environmentally friendly investment policies, particularly when those might underperform compared with other investments. Does the commission have a view on that suggested amendment?

Thank you very much.

Good morning. A key theme of the responses to the committee’s call for views was that it is important that the legislation is accessible to trustees and beneficiaries without legal backgrounds. Lady Paton, you alluded to that in your opening remarks. Ideas that the committee received to enhance accessibility included drafting changes, Government guidance, a publicity campaign and having template legal documents that could appear in the bill. Will you comment on those ideas, especially the proposal to have style or template legal documents in the legislation?

So, although there is nothing to prevent environmental investments, is it possible to have a clarifying amendment to make it clear that maximising financial returns is not the only permissible criterion?

I think that the issue requires further consideration.

Yes, please.

I move us on to section 72, which deals with succession. In policy terms, the definition of spouse or civil partner includes a spouse or civil partner that the deceased person was separated from but where no divorce or dissolution of the partnership had taken place. That means that a spouse or civil partner, in that circumstance, could benefit from section 72 of the bill, on the right to inherit.

The Law Society and various other respondents to the committee’s call for views have said that they would like to see a distinction drawn between spouses or civil partners who were living with the deceased person at the time of their death and those who had previously separated from the deceased person but had not divorced or had the partnership dissolved. What is the commission’s response to that suggestion?

The term “incapable” is defined in section 75 of the bill, and the definition is similar to the one that is used in the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000. In response to the committee’s call for views, the Law Society noted that the Scottish mental health review has recommended significant changes to capacity law in Scotland, which include removing the term “mental disorder” and moving from a capacity test to one of an ability to make an autonomous decision.

The Law Society suggested to the committee that the bill needs to be future proofed in case any changes to capacity law occur later in relation to the Scottish mental health review. We would be interested to hear your comments on the need for future proofing. If you think that that needs to be done, what are your thoughts on how it could be achieved?

I have no relevant interests to declare, thank you.