When an expert opinion places a person's mental or physical age well below the age of majority, can a court infer implied or express consent from that person to an act substantially affecting them?

No. Where there is a definitive opinion on disability endorsed by a specialist, domain expert or a doctor, the Court should give it due credence, and no inference of implied or express consent can be drawn. Unless there are strong reasons to disbelieve such a report, courts must be overly-cautious in reaching a contrary finding.

Habeas Corpus — Adult with intellectual disability — Capacity to give consent — Expert medical assessment — Parens patriae — Best interests and welfare — Comity of courts — Foreign guardianship order — Habeas Corpus — Capacity to consent — Definitive opinion on disability — Held: A definitive opinion on disability, endorsed by a specialist or doctor, placing a person's mental or physical age well below the age of majority forecloses any inference of implied or express consent. Courts must be overly-cautious before finding otherwise. (¶22) Habeas Corpus — Illegal detention — Oral interaction versus medical report — Held further: Courts may differ from an expert's report but cannot discard it as a whole for no rhyme or reason. Where reliability is doubted, an enquiry through a reputable medical institution must be ordered. (¶20) Parens patriae — Person incapable of independent decisions — Best interests and welfare — Held further: Once incapacity is established the Court assumes a parens patriae duty to decide what best serves that person's interests and welfare. Roots, education, support systems and family bonds are relevant. (¶24, 32) Comity of courts — Foreign guardianship order — Best interests prevail — Held further: A pre-existing order of a Foreign Court is merely one of the circumstances and must yield to the best interests and welfare of the person concerned. Appeal allowed; sole custody granted to the appellant. (¶31, 41)

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of Sharmila Velamur v. V. Sanjay and Ors. — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India