Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 342/2022 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court allows guardian removal when special cause exists under guardianship law Section 16.1.

Numero d'incarto KKO 342/2022
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Accolto (Allowed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court of Finland allowed the removal of a long-term guardian for a developmentally disabled brother, appointing a general guardian in his place. The guardian authority requested the change, arguing that a special cause existed under the Guardianship Act. The court ruled that the circumstances met the statutory requirement for removal, validating the authority's decision.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Section 16(1) of the Guardianship Act; A special cause for removing a guardian exists when the guardian's continued service is no longer in the ward's best interest or when the ward's condition has changed significantly.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
Guardianship Act removal of guardian special cause developmental disability general guardian best interest principle Supreme Court of Finland mutamento della situazione nel paese d'origine

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Section 16(1) of the Guardianship Act
Generato dall'IA
kko-precedent_2005_2
Supreme Court dismisses guardianship declaration due to lack of proven danger to assets from inactivity.
insurance_2019_3826-2018
Social security appeals board dismissed appeal as payment recipient determination falls outside its jurisdiction.
appeal_1981_eastern-finland__65
Court upheld guardianship decision against appeal, citing lack of need for public notice.
kho-precedent_1999_70
Supreme Administrative Court ruled that dismissing a pregnant teacher due to short-term availability constituted unlawful sex discrimination under Finnish equality law.
admin_1992_water-superior__88
Court rules that only the water regulation permit holder bears liability for damages caused by regulation operations.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

A oli hoitanut usean vuosikymmenen ajan kehitysvammaista veljeään B:tä ja toiminut tämän edunvalvojana. Holhousviranomainen pyysi hakemuksessaan, että A vapautetaan edunvalvojan tehtävästä ja että yleinen edunvalvoja määrätään B:n uudeksi edunvalvojaksi.

Kysymys siitä, oliko A:n vapauttamiseen edunvalvojan tehtävästä holhoustoimesta annetun lain 16 §:n 1 momentissa tarkoitettu erityinen syy.