An empirical study of actions on custodianship in Hungary

Our research on the operation of legal institutions related to the restriction of the legal capacity of adults (custodianship and supported decision-making) started in December 2019. Our present analysis of case law on custodianship and supported decision-making is based on cases published in the Collection of Court Decisions. The adoption of the new Hungarian Civil Code has clearly had a significant effect on the court decisions, as it made it compulsory to designate the categories of decisions to which a partial restriction on legal capacity applies. However, the change in regulation also implies a change of attitude that is considerably less apparent in the cases. In the context of international human rights expectations, any limitation of legal capacity should be applied as circumspectly as possible, and only in the most necessary cases. In the examined cases, the efforts of the Curia (the Hungarian Supreme Court) to reinforce this change of attitude in court practice may be detected but they are not extensive. At the same time, the spirit of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is not clearly reflected in court practice, and supported decision-making is not seen by courts as a real alternative to custodianship. Regarding the processes of the analyzed disputes, we found that the procedures in the published cases are relatively short, the higher courts in most cases upholding the decision of the lower courts, and that there is no legal or critical evaluation of any expert opinion. In a number of cases, the dominant function of custodianship is not the protection but the restriction of the rights of the given person and - against its declared goal - it serves to protect the interest of others. For example, property issues and the protection of the financial interests of family members are given priority in the published cases. In addition, there were several cases in which the authorities themselves sought to be 'protected' by limiting the capacity of the person to initiate official and judicial proceedings.