How can practitioners best navigate the uncertainty, conflict, inconsistency and tactical maneuvering that arise in cross-border capacity disputes, where the issue increasingly becomes less about whether a decision was understood and more about who controls the narrative of that decision after the fact? When a clinical question evolves into litigation strategy and forum shopping, is capacity being weaponized in private wealth disputes? How should courts and advisers approach the intersection of cultural and family dynamics with allegations of undue influence: are modern legal tests culturally biased, or is culture too often invoked as a shield for financial abuse? Are lawyers and trustees doing enough to protect against future capacity challenges, and can drafting techniques meaningfully reduce capacity risk? Finally, what practical steps can trustees take when a capacity dispute threatens to escalate into a multi-front risk event involving litigation, governance, reputation and family politics?