Facts
The Land Registrar of Z. rejected entries no. 1 and 2 of 10/13 January 1997 by C. concerning the registration of the sales contract and the creation of a bearer bond on the main sheet no. 3. He justified his decision by stating that, based on his own knowledge from a previous procedure and additional investigations, the vendors' incapacity of discernment and therefore incapacity to act at the time of the conclusion of the contract had to be assumed. On appeal by C., the Justice Commission of the Supreme Court of the Canton of Lucerne annulled the rejection decision of the Land Registry Office of Z. and ordered the registration of entries no. 1 and 2 in the Land Register, provided that the other conditions were met. A. filed an administrative law appeal against the decision of the Supreme Court and requests its annulment and the maintenance of the decision of 3 April 1997. The Supreme Court, the respondent and the Federal Department of Justice and Police (Federal Office of Justice) conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considers that the Land Registrar is not, in principle, required to examine the capacity of discernment of the disposer, unless it is manifest or notorious. In the present case, the Registrar exceeded his power of examination by seeking the opinion of the attending physician to clarify the vendors' capacity of discernment. In the absence of a formal decision or protective measure within the meaning of Art. 386 para. 2 CC, he should…