Meme vs Meme (Civil Side No 204 of 2011) [2012] SCSC 8 (24 January 2012)
- Citation
- [2012] SCSC 8
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Seychelles
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Posture
- Petition for Interdiction / Judgment
- Case number
- Civil Side No 204 of 2011
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Posture
- Petition for Interdiction / Judgment
- Case number
- Civil Side No 204 of 2011
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Respondent is incapable of managing her own affairs due to senile dementia, and the Applicant is willing and capable of acting as her guardian. The uncontroverted affidavit evidence supports granting the interdiction and appointing the Applicant as guardian.
Court disposition
Order of interdiction granted; Applicant appointed as guardian.
Orders
- Order of interdiction in respect of Doris Meme granted
- Melville Meme appointed as Guardian of Doris Meme
02
Material facts
Parties
Melville Meme
Applicant Counsel: Miss L. PoolDoris Meme
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Petition for Interdiction / Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the Respondent is incapable of managing her affairs due to senile dementia
- 02
Whether an order of interdiction should be granted and a guardian appointed
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The Respondent is suffering from senile dementia, her mental faculty is grossly impaired, and she is incapable of looking after her own affairs. She requires a person to act for her and look after her affairs.
- Respondent
- No objection was raised; the Office of the Attorney-General was served and did not object.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Articles 489 and 490 of the Civil Code of Seychelles
A person suffering from mental incapacity may be interdicted and a guardian appointed to manage their affairs.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Respondent is incapable of managing her own affairs due to senile dementia, and the Applicant is willing and capable of acting as her guardian. The uncontroverted affidavit evidence supports granting the interdiction and appointing the Applicant as guardian.
Court disposition
Order of interdiction granted; Applicant appointed as guardian.
- Order of interdiction in respect of Doris Meme granted
- Melville Meme appointed as Guardian of Doris Meme
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court
Judgment
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SEYCHELLES
MELVILLE MEME
APPLICANT
VERSUS
DORIS MEME
RESPONDENT ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Miss L. Pool for the Applicant Civil Side No 204 of 2011 B. Renaud J
JUDGMENT This is an Application by Petition for Interdiction made in terms of Articles 489 and 490 of the Civil Code of Seychelles. The Applicant Melville Meme is the husband of the Respondent Doris Meme who is willing and capable of acting for her. They both lived at Anse a La Mouche. The Respondent is 78 years old and is suffering from senile dementia and her mental faculty is impaired grossly. She is incapable of looking after her own affairs. The Respondent is in the process of filing a case before the Supreme Court with regard to her inheritance. The Respondent requires a person to act for her and look after her affairs. The Office of the Attorney-General was duly served with this process as Ministere Publique and there is no objection. After considering the uncontroverted affidavit evidence adduced by the Applicant, this Court now gives its judgment and makes the following orders: (a) grants an order of interdiction in respect of the Respondent Mrs. Doris Meme; (b) appoints the Applicant Mr. Melville Meme to be the Guardian of the Respondent Mrs. Doris Meme. B. RENAUD
JUDGE Dated this 25th day of January, 2012
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.