A HIGH COURT judge has expressed concern about a doctor’s qualifications and questioned his credibility. The judge’s ruling on July 25 has raised eyebrows and even prompted an order to forward the case to the Medical Board due to the perceived “potential harm” to the public.
The ruling stems from an application filed by five siblings seeking to challenge their 80-year-old mother’s claim for the partition and sale of a piece of land in Savana Grande, Princes Town. The basis for their challenge? Doubts about their mother’s mental capacity to make such a decision, backed up by contradictory medical certificates submitted as evidence.
Medical reports dated May 2022 and August 2023 were found to be lacking by Justice Ricky Rahim, with one being vague and the other offering little clarity. A subsequent report from a doctor based in San Fernando claimed the woman was competent to manage her affairs, sparking a further legal challenge.
Upon examination, a consultant psychiatrist found the woman lacking in sound mind and unable to handle her affairs safely due to early signs of dementia. Test results showed paranoid delusions and a compromised mental state that called into question her ability to make decisions.
However, the plot thickened during cross-examination when it was revealed that the San Fernando-based doctor lacked the qualifications to make such assessments. The judge expressed shock at this revelation, condemning the doctor’s actions as potentially fraudulent and raising doubts about his credibility.
Ultimately, the judge ruled against the validity of the woman’s claim, ordering her to cover a portion of her children’s legal costs and the expenses incurred during the striking-out application. The legal battle, which involved prominent attorneys on both sides, serves as a cautionary tale about the importance of credibility and qualification in sensitive matters of mental health and legal disputes.
