Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
III 2022 132 • VG SZ III 2022 132 KI-generiert

Appeal Regarding Protective Mandate Due to Incapacitation

Geschäftsnummer III 2022 132
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Schweiz · Kanton Schwyz (CH-SZ)
Entscheiddatum
Originalquelle öffnen Entscheidsuche-Spiegel Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The appellant challenged a decision by the lower court establishing a protective mandate for the adult on the grounds that the required state of necessity had not been sufficiently established. The court rejected the appeal, reasoning that the lower court had correctly determined that the adult was unable to manage their affairs due to health-related incapacitation, which established the necessary state of necessity under the relevant protection law to justify the imposition of the protective mandate.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Art. 66 Abs. 1 LTF; Appeal Regarding Protective Mandate Due to Incapacitation: The court rejected the appeal, reasoning that the lower court had correctly determined that the adult was unable to manage their affairs due to health-related incapacitation, which established the necessary state of necessity under the relevant protection law to justify the imposition of the protective mandate.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Staatsschutz Gesundheitszustand Dauer der Arbeitsunfähigkeit Verletzung von Schutznormen Begründungspflicht Auftragsverletzung

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
Art. 66 Abs. 1 LTF
The court ordered the appellant to pay the costs of the federal court proceedings.
KI-generiert
III 2018 209
Appeal Regarding Adult Protective Measure and Alternative Care Arrangement
III 2021 140
Appeal Against Continuation of Protective Measure for Person
III 2022 86
Appeal Against Protective Assistance Arrangement for Adult
III 2018 212
Appeal of Protective Measure Decision
III 2020 127
Child and Adult Protective Services Appeal

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
Art. 66 Abs. 1 LTF

The court ordered the appellant to pay the costs of the federal court proceedings.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n III 2022 132 |\n |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 17. Oktober 2022 |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n lic.iur. Gion Tomaschett, Vizepräsident |\n \n|\n |\n Monica Huber-Landolt, Richterin lic.iur. Karl Gasser, Richter |\n \n|\n |\n MLaw Oxana Straub, a.o. Gerichtsschreiberin |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Parteien |\n A.________ |\n \n|\n |\n gegen |\n \n|\n |\n Kindesund Erwachsenenschutzbehörde (KESB), Vorinstanz, |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Gegenstand |\n Kindesund Erwachsenenschutzrecht (Errichtung einer Vertretungsbeistandschaft) |\n \n\n

\n \n

Sachverhalt: