Commentary on the Judgment of the Supreme Court, Sec. I, Order No. 24878/2024: Support Administration and Self-Determination

The recent order of the Supreme Court, No. 24878/2024, sheds new light on the delicate issues related to support administration, a legal institution designed to protect those in a state of fragility. In this case, the appellant, A.A., opposed the appointment of a support administrator, asserting his full capacity to understand and will. The Court accepted the appeal, emphasizing the importance of respecting the autonomy and dignity of the individual, a fundamental aspect to consider in such proceedings.

The Case and the Reasons for the Judgment

The case in question concerned A.A., who contested the opening of a support administration ordered following an application by his son. The Court of Appeal of Venice had initially granted the request, justifying the measure with alleged inadequate financial actions and a general condition of fragility. However, the Supreme Court highlighted that the measure of support administration must be applied cautiously and only in the presence of a confirmed capacity deficit, as provided by Article 404 of the Civil Code.

The measure of support administration must always be the least invasive possible, respecting the autonomy of the person concerned.

Fundamental Principles on Support Administration

According to current legislation, support administration is a flexible tool designed to adapt to the specific needs of the beneficiary. The Court reiterated that:

• The appointment of a support administrator must not occur exploratively, but only after confirming a condition of fragility.
• It is essential to respect the wishes of the beneficiary, even when there is a reluctance to receive assistance.
• The measure must be proportionate and must not excessively limit the individual's capacity to act.

These principles are essential to ensure that legal protection does not result in a violation of the individual's rights. The Court also referred to previous jurisprudence that highlights the importance of an accurate assessment of the personal and financial situation of the beneficiary.

Conclusions

The judgment No. 24878/2024 of the Supreme Court represents an important step forward in the protection of the rights of vulnerable individuals. It reaffirms the necessity of an approach that respects the autonomy and dignity of the individual, emphasizing that every protective measure must be carefully considered and justified. The Court therefore accepted the appeal, overturning the order to open the support administration and remanding the case to the Court of Appeal for further examination. It is crucial that in the future, measures of protection continue to be aimed at effectively safeguarding the interests of the beneficiary, without compromising their freedom and self-determination.