Facts

The case concerns the liability of guardianship authority members in the context of a guardianship. The plaintiff, X., is the sole heir of his uncle, Y., who was placed under guardianship in 1999. The guardianship was entrusted to G., who was appointed by the guardianship authority. However, G. did not establish an inventory of Y.'s assets and used part of the proceeds from the sale of a property belonging to Y. for her own benefit. The plaintiff brought a liability action against the members of the guardianship authority, A., B., C., D., and E., to obtain compensation for the damage suffered.

The key facts are as follows

  • Y. was placed under guardianship in 1999 and G. was appointed as guardian.
  • G. did not establish an inventory of Y.'s assets despite repeated requests from the guardianship authority.
  • G. used part of the proceeds from the sale of a property belonging to Y. for her own benefit.
  • The plaintiff brought a liability action against the members of the guardianship authority to obtain compensation for the damage suffered.

Considerations

The decision of the federal court is based on the analysis of the liability of guardianship authority members in the context of a guardianship. The court considered that the members of the guardianship authority had violated their duties of diligence by not reporting the lack of inventory in writing to the guardian until more than three months after the guardianship measure came into force.

The court also considered that the inadequate supervision of the guardian by the members of the guardianship authority had resulted in an adequate causal link between the…