Hypothetical Capacity Question

CIARAN_BOYLE

I know an epileptic. After a seizure he may not be right in the mind for sometime. He may not know where or who he is or who anyone else is. Sometimes he has strange urges after a seizure untill his mind clears.

It can be to go for a walk or to sell the house or go to bed (a midday). If he was alone with someone who wished to take advantage of him it would be relatively easy to convince him to make any deal.

Would a deal afreed while he was suffering the after effects of his seizures be valid. Lets say he is in the garden has a seizure and decides he wants to sell the house. He shouts it out and a neighbour comes over and offers him a low amount of money for the house. He agrees because of aftereffect of seizure. Would contract be in anyway binding. I have always assumed that it wouldn't because he isn't really in his right mind after a seizure. His wife feels that any contract her epileptic husband agreed to after a seizure would be valid.

Any thoughts.

32minutes

Capacity to contract is a requirement for a legally binding contract, if he is not capable of the requisite capacity then there can be no "meeting of the minds" and the contract would be void ab initio (from the beginning)

Courts have held in the past however that even if someone generally lacks the capacity to contract; they can still have "lucid intervals" where they can enter into contracts which are valid, it wouldn't be very fair on this hypothetical person if he could never sell his house even if he was not after suffering a seizure.

Ultimately the main problem would be the for this person seeking to repudiate contract would be the evidentiary burden placed on them. Having epilepsy might give them a good place to start off with but they would ultimately have to prove that they lacked capacity at the moment of contract. But then again most important contracts such as house sales etc generally require witness' signatures so the scope for abuse might be smaller than you would think

CIARAN_BOYLE

Thanks for that answer man. Jus a follow up question?

So selling the house isn't a good example but otherwise he could enter a contract and someone could seek to enforce it and since the burden of proof is on the person seeking to repudite a contract is very difficult to prove that he had a seizure.

If the contract was rediculous and one sided would the court take into account that the epileptic obviously would not have signed the contract had he been in his right mind.

Victor

Of course, the person could be held to a contract for necessities. So if he got into a taxi and asked to be driven to his GP's office, it would be difficult to refuse to pay.

Asking for a €1,000 bottle of wine, hmmmm...

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

If the contract was rediculous and one sided would the court take into account that the epileptic obviously would not have signed the contract had he been in his right mind.

It may go for evidence, but might not be conclusive. People sign stupid things all the time.