Inconsistencies in Guardianship Cases

Abstract

Hungary ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter: CRPD) in 2007. The Hungarian Civil Code was accordingly amended in 2014. Although the new Civil Code introduced supported decision making, it did not fully abolish guardianship. The aim of this study is to evaluate the implementation of the new rules through recent jurisprudence of Hungarian courts. Due to the fact that guardianship judgements have a major impact on the basic human rights of nearly 60,000 persons with disabilities who are placed under some form of guardianship, the authors chose to analyse civil law cases in the constitutional framework. A detailed analysis is provided on the application of legal principles set forth in the new Civil Code, such as necessity, proportionality, graduality in the chosen guardianship cases. This study aims at pointing out how far the implementation of international standards has gone in relation to the constitutional restriction of fundamental rights, examining the dangersprevalent in cases influenced by expert opinions and contributing to the effective support of persons with disabilities to respect, protect and fulfil their fundamental rights on an equal basis with others.