Date: 12/09/2014
Final
Recognition of Substitute Decision-making Documents Act
COLORADO COMMISSION ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS
| Votes: View--> | Action Taken: |
| <none> | <none> |
10:38 AM -- Recognition of Substitute Decision-making Documents Act
Catherine Hance, Colorado Bar Association - Real Estate (RE) Section, voiced concerns over the term "jurisdiction" stating that it seems to be written very broadly and could be interpreted to cover documents from any country. In addition, the consequences of not accepting the offered translations at face value could cause extra costs for a second translation and for legal advice. Real Estate law has recently seen varying levels of increased fraud and inadequately verified translations of property descriptions may become a problem. The RE Section can see this law being easily used and also needing a certain amount of breadth for health or medical concerns but is concerned about someone having to accept documents that may be difficult to verify or costly to translate. The RE Section supports this act as long as real estate transactions are not part of it.
Commissioner Mielke pointed out that this act has gone through substantial review without these concerns being raised and asked if there was something different about Colorado law. Ms. Hance suggested that Colorado has its own power of attorney law and additional laws protecting real estate transactions, perhaps other states do not have similar laws in place. Commissioner Mielke suggested taking these concerns to the ULC and Commissioner Shaffer agreed. Commissioner Kent pointed out that this act is meant to be an overlay to the power of attorney laws and intended to buttress other law and it is not trying to change power of attorney laws.
John DeBruyn, Colorado Bar Association - Business Law (BL) Section, expressed concern with the meaning and effect regarding controlling law in this act. The BL Section is looking for clarification regarding to what extent foreign law is to be imported and where the line is drawn between commercial transaction and agency agreement/relationship. Seems that one portion may say Colorado law applies and another might say a different state or country has jurisdiction. Mr. Bruyn also voiced some concerns during the above Fiduciary Access discussion regarding the scope and reach of these acts.
Commissioners Kent and McGihon explained that the act states that if this document is valid in a foreign jurisdiction then it is also valid in Colorado and that it does not try to import foreign law. Mr. DeBryun would like either the law or the comments to make it clearer that foreign law is not being imported.
Steve Brainerd, Colorado Bar Association - Trusts & Estates (TE) Section, would like more time to consider the proposed act and to reach out to other sections of the bar and other health related professionals. They are in general agreement with law, but would like more time to consider impact.
Lori Hulbert, Colorado Bar Association - Elder Law (EL) Section, agreed with Mr. Brainerd regarding the need for more time to consider the act and reach out to others.
Commissioner McGihon agreed that it would be desirable to be able to give the Colorado Bar Association more time to consider and vet proposed acts, but there are times when the CCUSL may need to move things along to better meet upcoming drafting deadlines.