In Brief
A student admitted to an MBBS programme in the Philippines through an Indian educational agent (HCMI) sought compensation when the Philippines government abolished the MBBS course midway. The student filed a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act. The Supreme Court held that the agent was merely a facilitator whose role ended once admission was secured. A foreign government's policy decision to abolish an academic programme cannot form the basis of a complaint against an admission agent, as no vicarious liability attaches to the intermediary for such sovereign policy acts. The Court accordingly allowed the appeal and dismissed the complaint.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.