The Court of Cassation held that the guardianship judge has not had to proceed under protection.
Yet guardianship The Supreme Court said Monday that the withdrawal of Françoise Bettencourt Meyers of his application for guardianship of her mother Liliane Bettencourt at their reconciliation late 2010 does not allow the guardianship judge to continue this procedure put under protection.
This view of the high court has little effect on the future of any decision of judicial protection against the billionaire.The guardianship court Courbevoie was indeed again beginning in June seized by Françoise Bettencourt Meyers by other means.
In December 2010, a pact of reconciliation between mother and daughter led to a withdrawal of the third application for guardianship filed by Françoise Bettencourt Meyers.The guardianship court had then called the Supreme Court to ask whether it was entitled to pursue its investigation into the need for legal measures to protect the billionaire.
The guardianship court pressure
But on June 7, breaking the nonaggression agreement sealed with his mother, Françoise Bettencourt Meyers has again turned to the judge of guardianships of Courbevoie, asking him to verify the correct implementation of the mandate for future protection given by the billionaire to his lawyer Pascal Wilhelm, accused of "exploit" Liliane Bettencourt.
The main effect of the opinion of the Court of Cassation will be to the guardianship judge under pressure to make its decision on the new referral.
If the high court had held that the wardship proceedings could continue, the judge should have made its decision by October, one year after the start of proceedings.
"Altered mental and physical"
She now has only a few weeks to hear and decide the motion on account of implementation of the mandate of current protection.It can either take a provisional safeguard measure, or decide on the merits the issue of protecting Ms. Bettencourt.
In a report late May to the guardianship judge Courbevoie, three doctors are seeing a "joint deterioration of mental and physical" the heir to L'Oreal, they consider achieving a "brain disease" but have examined.They recommend placing under curatorship enhanced device midway between the mandate of protection and guardianship.
For Further Reading,
