Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Preface
- Contents
- List of Contributors
- Australia: The Search for Property in the Labyrinth of the Discretionary Trust
- Brazil: Intuitu Personae Adoption in the Brazilian Legal System
- Canada: Family Law at the Supreme Court of Canada
- China: Reform of the Marriage and Family Part of the Civil Code in China
- England and Wales: Beware of International Relationships
- European Court of Human Rights: Challenging Paternity under Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights
- France: A Chronicle of French Family Law: 2019
- Germany: Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation and Parentage: Family Law Lagging Behind
- Hong Kong: Hong Kong Family Law Today: Drowning not Waving?
- Korea: Full Guardianship in Korean Law: An Evaluation Over Seven Years from the Perspective of Family Court Practices and the Constitution
- Norway: The New Norwegian Adoption Act
- Poland: Discussion and Reform of Family Law in Poland
- Scotland: Making Scotland ‘The Best Place in the World to Grow Up’?
- Serbia: Child Maintenance and Welfare in Serbian Law
- Slovenia: New Regulation on Guardianship for Adults in Slovenia
- South Africa: Aspects of Dutch Colonial Family Law Related to the Indonesian Rajah of Tambora’s Exile at the Cape
- Sweden and California: On Children’s Rights to be Heard in Custody and Support Matters
- UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: Continued Reflections on Family Law Issues in the Jurisprudence of the CRC Committee: The Convention on the Rights of the Child @ 30
- Index
Korea: Full Guardianship in Korean Law: An Evaluation Over Seven Years from the Perspective of Family Court Practices and the Constitution
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 February 2021
- Frontmatter
- Preface
- Contents
- List of Contributors
- Australia: The Search for Property in the Labyrinth of the Discretionary Trust
- Brazil: Intuitu Personae Adoption in the Brazilian Legal System
- Canada: Family Law at the Supreme Court of Canada
- China: Reform of the Marriage and Family Part of the Civil Code in China
- England and Wales: Beware of International Relationships
- European Court of Human Rights: Challenging Paternity under Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights
- France: A Chronicle of French Family Law: 2019
- Germany: Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation and Parentage: Family Law Lagging Behind
- Hong Kong: Hong Kong Family Law Today: Drowning not Waving?
- Korea: Full Guardianship in Korean Law: An Evaluation Over Seven Years from the Perspective of Family Court Practices and the Constitution
- Norway: The New Norwegian Adoption Act
- Poland: Discussion and Reform of Family Law in Poland
- Scotland: Making Scotland ‘The Best Place in the World to Grow Up’?
- Serbia: Child Maintenance and Welfare in Serbian Law
- Slovenia: New Regulation on Guardianship for Adults in Slovenia
- South Africa: Aspects of Dutch Colonial Family Law Related to the Indonesian Rajah of Tambora’s Exile at the Cape
- Sweden and California: On Children’s Rights to be Heard in Custody and Support Matters
- UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: Continued Reflections on Family Law Issues in the Jurisprudence of the CRC Committee: The Convention on the Rights of the Child @ 30
- Index
Summary
Résumé
Le régime de la tutelle des majeurs dans le Code civil coréen a été fondementalement modifié en 2011. La nouvelle tutelle est entrée en vigueur en 2013. Le nouveau régime prévoit que le protecteur intervient dans les décisions du majeur protégé uniquement en cas de nécessité. Cependant, le régime a été critiqué car il porterait une atteinte injustifiée au droit de la personne atteinte de trouble mental de s’auto-déterminer. Cette critique s’est intensifiée depuis la ratification par le gouvernement coréen de la Convention internationale relative aux droits des personnes handicapées et l’interprétation radicale de l’article 12 de la Convention par le Comité des droits des personnes handicapées. Le 27 décembre 2019, la Cour constitutionnelle coréenne a considéré dans deux affaires que la tutelle complète prévue par le Code civil n’est pas incompatible avec la Constitution. L’observation générale n° 1 du Comité des droits des personnes handicapées n’ayant pas de force contraignante et l’interprétation de l’article 12 étant trop radicale, les décisions de la Cour constitutionnelle sont compréhensibles. L’une des raisons pour lesquelles la Corée est confrontée à cette difficulté seulement cinq ans après l’entrée en vigueur de la réforme sur la tutelle est que l’application pratique de celle-ci est décevante. En réalité, la loi nouvelle permet l’utilisation d’une tutelle générale qui favorise la protection intrafamiliale, ce qui garantit la protection du majeur en étendant les cas dans lesquels la tutelle peut être prononcée, mais cela se fait au détriment de son autonomie. Dans ces conditions, une réforme prochaine de la loi coréenne est inévitable.
INTRODUCTION
Since its enactment in 1958, there have been two forms of adult guardianship under the Korean Civil Code: complete incompetency and limited incompetency. As the terms adopted in the Code suggest, the adult guardianship system under the Code presupposed the full or partial incompetency of the ward and implemented a system of a legal representative (guardian) on behalf of the incompetent ward.. Unfortunately, these two adult guardianships were rarely used in practice. Inspired by the adult guardianship law reforms in many other jurisdictions over the last few decades, the Korean Ministry of Justice fundamentally revised the adult guardianship law in the Korean Civil Code in 2011, and this came into force in 2013.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- International Survey of Family Law 20202020 Edition, pp. 165 - 184Publisher: IntersentiaPrint publication year: 2020