Naming Multiple Attorneys in an NWT Power of Attorney

Why Families Consider Multiple Attorneys

Naming one child as attorney while others are excluded is a recipe for family conflict — especially when an aging parent's finances are at stake. Many NWT families consider naming two or more attorneys to distribute responsibility, provide checks and balances, and prevent the resentment that comes with singling out one sibling.

The Powers of Attorney Act (SNWT 2001, c 15) permits naming multiple attorneys. But the practical implications depend entirely on how the authority is structured.

Joint vs. Several Authority

When a POA names multiple attorneys, the document must specify whether they act jointly, severally, or jointly and severally. This distinction has real consequences when decisions need to be made quickly.

Joint Authority

All named attorneys must agree on every decision and sign every transaction together. No single attorney can act alone.

Pros: Maximum accountability — no one person has unilateral control. Every financial decision has built-in oversight.

Cons: Every transaction requires coordination. If two attorneys live in different cities (one in Yellowknife, one in Edmonton), getting both signatures on a bank form or property sale requires deliberate scheduling. If one attorney is unavailable — travelling, hospitalized, or simply unresponsive — nothing moves. The other attorney cannot pay bills, access accounts, or manage investments until their co-attorney participates.

In remote NWT communities with unreliable communication infrastructure, joint authority can create dangerous delays.

Several Authority

Each named attorney can act independently. Either one can make financial decisions, access accounts, and conduct transactions without the other's involvement.

Pros: Maximum flexibility — decisions happen quickly regardless of each attorney's availability. Practical when attorneys live in different locations or have different schedules.

Cons: Minimal oversight. One attorney can make decisions the other disagrees with or doesn't know about. If the attorneys have different ideas about how to manage the donor's finances, conflicting instructions to banks and institutions create chaos.

Jointly and Severally

This is the hybrid: attorneys can act either together or independently, depending on the situation. The document may specify which types of decisions require joint agreement (selling real estate, for example) while allowing either attorney to handle routine matters alone (paying bills, managing day-to-day banking).

This structure is usually the most practical choice, but it needs to be carefully drafted to avoid ambiguity about which decisions fall into which category.

What Happens When Attorneys Disagree

NWT law doesn't provide a built-in dispute resolution mechanism for disagreements between joint attorneys. When two attorneys can't agree on a financial decision:

Under joint authority: The decision simply can't be made. Neither attorney has the legal power to override the other. The impasse continues until they reach agreement — or until one of them applies to the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories for directions.

Under several authority: Either attorney can act unilaterally, so disagreement doesn't prevent action. But it can result in conflicting transactions — one attorney instructing the bank to sell investments while the other instructs them to hold. Banks caught in the middle may freeze the account and require a court order to proceed.

Court intervention: Any interested party can apply to the Supreme Court for an order resolving the dispute, replacing one attorney, or modifying the terms of the POA. This is expensive and time-consuming — exactly the kind of friction that proactive planning should avoid.

Naming Alternate (Successor) Attorneys

A simpler structure that provides continuity without the complications of joint authority: name a primary attorney and one or more alternate attorneys who step in only if the primary can no longer serve.

An alternate attorney's authority activates when the primary attorney:

• Dies
• Becomes incapacitated themselves
• Resigns (with court permission, for enduring POAs)
• Is removed by court order

This approach gives one person clear decision-making authority while ensuring the POA doesn't fail entirely if something happens to the primary attorney. It avoids the coordination problems of joint authority and the oversight gaps of several authority.

Practical Considerations for NWT Families

Geography matters. If your family members are spread across the NWT and southern Canada, naming co-attorneys who both live in Edmonton creates coordination problems when the bank branch in Yellowknife needs an in-person signature. Consider whether at least one attorney is located in or near the donor's community.

Communication infrastructure. Remote NWT communities may have limited internet and phone service. Joint authority that requires coordination between an attorney in Yellowknife and one in a fly-in community is a structural problem waiting to happen.

Relationship dynamics. Naming all three children as joint attorneys to avoid playing favourites sounds equitable — but it means three people must agree on every financial decision. When one sibling has a history of financial irresponsibility, giving them equal authority over a parent's finances may not serve the donor's interests.

Bank acceptance. Financial institutions generally prefer dealing with a single attorney. A POA with three named attorneys, complex conditions about which decisions require joint agreement, and no clear hierarchy of authority is more likely to face bank rejection. The simpler the structure, the smoother the implementation.

The Recipient as an Oversight Alternative

Instead of naming multiple attorneys (with all the coordination problems that creates), consider naming one primary attorney and designating a recipient — a person who has the legal right under the Powers of Attorney Act to demand a full accounting from the attorney at any time.

This structure gives one person clear authority to act efficiently while providing another person with the ability to monitor what's happening. It combines operational simplicity with meaningful oversight — often a better balance than joint authority for families concerned about accountability.

Making the Decision

Our Northwest Territories Power of Attorney Kit covers the full range of attorney appointment structures: joint, several, jointly and severally, and alternate appointments. It includes worksheets for evaluating which structure fits your family's geography, relationships, and practical needs.

See more Northwest Territories guides →