Is it permissible to adopt Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah’s view that the marriage contract is valid even if explicit agency (wakalah) is not verbally expressed, so long as the husband is pleased and circumstantial evidence indicates his consent?

Authorization is valid with any expression that indicates it, and a specific wording is not required for it. According to Ibn Taymiyyah, anything that indicates consent is sufficient, because customary permission is like verbal permission; both are concluded by what indicates them, whether by word or deed. And knowledge of the beneficiary's consent takes the place of their explicit manifestation of consent.