Is the father's act of taking possession sufficient when he gifts an item to his minor son?

Primary text

When a father gifts something to his son, the father's taking possession and acceptance on the son's behalf suffices, provided it is needed. There is a scholarly consensus among those whose opinions are recorded that if a man gifts a specific house or slave to his infant son, and he takes possession on his behalf and witnesses it, the gift is complete. This is the position of Malik, Thawri, Shafi'i, and the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y). Evidence for this is found in the report from Malik, via Zuhri, via Ibn al-Musayyab, that Uthman declared valid a gift given by a man to his young son who has not reached the age of independently accepting a gift, provided the father announces it and witnesses it, even if the father acts as the guardian for the possession. Furthermore, if the gifted item requires physical taking possession, the statement, 'I have gifted this to my son, and I have taken possession of it for him,' is sufficient because it substitutes for acceptance. If the item does not require physical possession, only the statement, 'I have gifted this to my son,' is required, without mentioning taking possession or acceptance.