Samuel identified a material conflict of interest arising from the trustee’s dual role as attorney and trustee. While technically permitted, this creates a fiduciary conflict and exposes the trustee to future challenge, particularly if the release is perceived to benefit her personally. Samuel advised that any such signature must be authorised by the Court of Protection to avoid liability. The risk is heightened by potential third-party claims against the estate and the involvement of insurers who may be drawn into proceedings. The release is being considered ahead of schedule, and the insurers require a properly executed deed of release. The settlor’s lack of capacity prevents direct execution, and the alternative of leaving the trust running was discussed but deemed impractical given the intention to liquidate.