Guardianship must be necessary or a guardianship is sufficient

At the request of her grandson, who fears that she might squander her property, a grandmother who is already under guardianship is placed under guardianship.

The judge increases the protective measure on the basis of medical certificates suggesting a moderate impairment of his intellectual faculties, an emotional nature, a fear of doing something wrong or even some memory problems. The judge, informed by these expert opinions, considers the guardianship insufficient to protect the elderly person and opens instead a guardianship, a stronger legal protection measure. Unlike the guardianship, which is a measure of assistance to the person, guardianship is a system of representation which deprives the major of his rights. Under guardianship, the person becomes a “incapable person” in the legal sense. The Nîmes Court of Appeal, seised by the grandmother, upheld the decision of the guardianship judge.

The Court of Cassation quashes and quashes the judgment of the Court of Appeal. It recalls that the fact that a person is so influential, vulnerable, too sentimental that his interests are at risk is not a sufficient reason to open a guardianship, even for someone with a wealth or a large income likely to attract greed. In this way, the vulnerable person is proved right, because guardianship should never be granted out of convenience to the family or close acquaintances, but out of necessity for the protected person.