One. Basic facts of the case
In the case of the special procedure for the guardianship of the claimant Wang A and the respondent Wang Yi, Wang Jia claimed that he was the stepson of the ward Wang Bing, and that the father-son relationship had been formed for more than 30 years, and the guardianship order should have preceded Wang Yi, who was Wang Bing's brother. In addition, Wang Jia said that in August 2019, through the case of Wang Bing v. Wang Ding's divorce dispute, he learned that the Judgment of the LiCang Court designated Wang Yi as Wang Bing's guardian, in which Wang Yi, Wang Bing's mother Jiang Mou, younger brother Wang E, and two staff members in the community all said that Wang Bing and Wang Ding were divorced and had no children. However, its claim that the above matters are not true, Wang Yi, Jiang Mou, and Wang E, as interested parties, have all made false statements for personal interests, and the two community workers cannot fully grasp Wang Bing's family relationship, resulting in the court making an erroneous judgment based on this, and the order of appointing guardians is wrong. Therefore, he applied for an order to appoint him as the guardian of Wang Bing, a person without capacity for civil conduct.
Two. The result of the referee
The Li Cang court held that Wang Bing was a person without capacity for civil conduct, his father was deceased, his mother Jiang Mou was over 90 years old, and his spouse Wang Ding had a second-degree intellectual disability, and the two still needed to be cared for and were unable to serve as guardians. Wang Bing and Wang Jia's biological mother Wang Ding registered their marriage on October 10, 1986, when Wang Jia was not yet a minor and lived with Wang Bing and Wang Ding, and Wang Bing and Wang Jia had formed a stepfather relationship with a nurturing relationship. Wang Yi was the brother of Wang Bing. From the perspective of the legal guardianship order, Wang Jia, as the children of the respondent, has priority over Wang Yi in the order of serving as guardian. Based on the facts of this case, Wang Jia and Wang Yi bear certain responsibilities for the deterioration of family conflicts between the two parties, and the deterioration of the relationship is directly related to the demolition of the house under the name of the ward. Both parties shall properly resolve family conflicts from the perspective of the principle of caring for and supporting the ward and protecting the interests of the ward. In the 2019 special procedures case, all the statements made by the interrogated person that Wang Bing and Wang Ding were divorced and childless were not facts. As the legal representative of Wang Bing's divorce dispute, after the divorce case has been withdrawn and taken effect, Wang Yi should be aware of the fact that Wang Bing is not divorced, and the fact that Wang Bing has a stepson is also known, but he conceals the above facts and then obtains custody. In summary, the Li Cang court held that the judgment on appointing Wang Yi as Wang Bing's guardian in the original special procedure case should be revoked, and Wang Jia should be appointed as Wang Bing's guardian.
3. Summary of the Trial
The determination of guardians of adults without or limited capacity for civil conduct shall be considered from the perspective of being conducive to the ward's physical and mental health, and the guardians who are ranked first shall be determined first. Guardians shall perform guardianship duties in accordance with the principle of the ward's best interests. If a guardian has a legal situation that is unfavorable to guardianship, the relevant individual or organization has the legal right to request the revocation of guardianship qualifications in accordance with law.
Four. Relevant laws
Civil Code of the People's Republic of China
Article 28: Adults without or with limited capacity for civil conduct are to be guardians in order by the following persons with guardianship capacity:
(1) spouse;
(2) Parents and children;
(3) Other close relatives;
(4) Other individuals or organizations willing to serve as guardians, but only with the consent of the residents' committee, villagers' committee, or civil affairs department of the ward's domicile.
Article 36: In any of the following circumstances, the people's courts are to revoke their guardianship qualifications on the basis of an application from the relevant individual or organization, arrange necessary temporary guardianship measures, and lawfully appoint a guardian in accordance with the principle of the ward's greatest benefit:
(1) Carrying out conduct that seriously harms the ward's physical and mental health;
(2) Neglecting to perform guardianship duties, or being unable to perform guardianship duties and refusing to entrust part or all of guardianship duties to others, resulting in the ward being in a state of distress;
(3) Carrying out other conduct that seriously infringes upon the lawful rights and interests of wards.
The relevant individuals and organizations provided for in this article include: other persons with guardianship qualifications in accordance with law, residents' committees, villagers' committees, schools, medical institutions, women's federations, disabled persons' federations, organizations for the protection of minors, organizations for the elderly established in accordance with law, and civil affairs departments.
Where individuals and organizations other than civil affairs departments provided for in the preceding paragraph fail to promptly apply to the people's courts for revocation of guardianship qualifications, the civil affairs departments shall apply to the people's courts.
Five. Case interpretation
The family is the cell of society, family harmony and stability is the foundation of national development and social progress, and people without civil capacity or limited capacity for civil conduct are vulnerable groups in society, and protecting their legitimate rights and interests is the common responsibility of the whole society.
The Civil Code sets up guardianship qualifications for other civil subjects based on the convenience of closeness and guardianship, which is statutory and the guardian may not refuse. The guardianship order of persons with incomplete capacity for civil conduct is their spouse, parents, children, and close relatives, which is the legal order and must not be arbitrarily disrupted. When determining a guardian, it should be comprehensively considered and judged in combination with various factors such as family structure and living environment, and the true will of the ward's heart should be explored, so as to achieve the principle of the most favorable to the ward.
Source: Qingdao Licang District Court