A.S v M.E & Anor (MA 317 of 2016) [2018] SCSC 347 (11 December 2018)

A.S v M.E & Anor (MA 317 of 2016) [2018] SCSC 347 (11 December 2018)

The marriage of the interdicted Petitioner was annulled because he lacked the capacity to comprehend the consequences of marriage and did not obtain the required consent from his guardian or a judge. The evidence did not establish grounds for removing the Respondent as guardian, nor for substituting the wife as guardian, as the Respondent had not acted incompetently, dishonestly, or with notorious misconduct.

Citation
[2018] SCSC 347
Parties
Petitioner: A. S.; Respondent: M. E.; Interested Party: Attorney General (Ministère Public)
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
11 December 2018
Case Number
MA 317 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Application Arising From Interdiction and Guardianship Proceedings / Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Marriage annulled; application to lift interdiction or substitute guardian dismissed.
Legal Topics
Interdiction, Guardianship, Capacity to Marry, Nullity of Marriage, Removal of Guardian
Source Language
English
Family Law Mental Health Law Civil Procedure Interdiction Guardianship Capacity to Marry Nullity of Marriage Removal of Guardian

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. S.

Petitioner

M. E.

Respondent

Attorney General (Ministère Public)

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Application Arising From Interdiction and Guardianship Proceedings / Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the marriage of an interdicted person without guardian or judicial consent is valid
  2. 2 Whether the interdiction order should be lifted or the guardian substituted

Ratio Decidendi

The marriage of the interdicted Petitioner was annulled because he lacked the capacity to comprehend the consequences of marriage and did not obtain the required consent from his guardian or a judge. The evidence did not establish grounds for removing the Respondent as guardian, nor for substituting the wife as guardian, as the Respondent had not acted incompetently, dishonestly, or with notorious misconduct.

Court Disposition

Marriage annulled; application to lift interdiction or substitute guardian dismissed.

Orders

  • The marriage celebrated between the Petitioner and his wife on 19 May 2015 is annulled for lack of valid consent.
  • The application to lift the interdiction order against the Petitioner is dismissed.