Guardianship Case Answer Petition Example
COURT OF PEACE
CASE NO.: E.
RESTRICTED PARTY:
ATTORNEY:
PLAINTIFF:
ATTORNEY:
SUBJECT: Submission of our response to the lawsuit and evidence.
EXPLANATIONS:
In the case file referenced above, the plaintiff claims that the client is not of sound mind due to his age and circumstances, that he is unable to manage his personal affairs, that he is highly susceptible to deception, and that he has squandered his assets for these reasons. The plaintiff therefore requests to be appointed as the client’s guardian. We do not accept the plaintiff’s request to become the client’s guardian as unjust, motivated by financial gain, and malicious. This is because:
Contrary to the plaintiff’s claims, the client is mentally competent to continue his life independently, has no physical disabilities, and is therefore not in need of protection or care. The plaintiff’s claims are contrary to the truth and are entirely abstract. Because,
Upon your court’s request, in a memorandum dated ../../2022 sent to the District Gendarmerie Command, asking for an investigation into “whether there is a conflict of interest between the ward and the guardian candidate and whether there is any objection to the guardian candidate being appointed as guardian to the ward,” … the District Gendarmerie Command conducted an investigation and, in a report dated ../../2022, determined that “there is a conflict of interest between the restricted candidate and the guardian candidate and that it is inadvisable and inappropriate for the guardian candidate to be appointed as guardian to the restricted candidate.”
Again, in the memorandum dated ../../2022 written by your court to the District Gendarmerie Command, it was stated that “there is a conflict of interest between the plaintiff and his father, who is the restricted candidate, and that it is inadvisable for him to be appointed as guardian, and the reasons for this determination should be stated.” 2022, requesting “the reasons for determining that there is a conflict of interest between the plaintiff and his father, who is the restricted candidate, and that his appointment as guardian would be inadvisable, the indication of who provided the information, the nature of the conflict of interest, and the determination of the event in which their interests conflicted…” As a result of the investigation conducted by the District Gendarmerie Command, the minutes dated ../../.2022 stated that “……. And …, it was determined that the conflict between the individuals stemmed from a dispute over the distribution of inheritance between father and son, that the plaintiff may have filed this lawsuit because the defendant, who is a restricted ward, donated land belonging to him to an association, that the defendant is of sound mind and has no physical disability …”
As will be clearly understood from these investigations conducted by your court, there is a conflict of interest between the plaintiff and the defendant, who is the principal, due to the dispute over the distribution of inheritance. The plaintiff, taking advantage of the principal’s absence abroad, has filed this lawsuit with the aim of rendering the principal ineffective both physically and legally and freely disposing of the principal’s movable and immovable property. Moreover, it is known by all circles that the plaintiff views his client only in material terms and constantly tries to extract money from him. The plaintiff’s intention is far from being a guardian.
Although your honorable court has written to Elmalı State Hospital to obtain a Medical Board Report, we request that the Medical Board Report to be prepared for the client be obtained from a fully equipped healthcare institution in Antalya with expertise in the relevant field. The representative will arrive in Turkey in the coming days, and upon their arrival, an application will be made to your Honorable Court, requesting that they be referred to a fully equipped hospital with expertise in the subject matter, as determined by your Honorable Court. Considering the plaintiff’s bad faith and the benefit they aim to gain by filing this case, it would be more appropriate to obtain a report from a hospital located in the province to which the plaintiff belongs, outside the district where they currently reside, in order to ascertain the material truth.
In conclusion, the client’s mental health is perfectly sound, and he is capable of managing his own affairs without needing any assistance for his protection and care. The client is healthy enough to spend part of the year in Germany and part in Turkey, and he also has freedom of movement. The fact that he undergoes certain medical treatments does not mean that he is mentally incompetent. Furthermore, considering the assets registered in the name of the principal, the fact that he has donated only two plots of land does not lead to the conclusion that this will cause him or his family to fall into poverty. For these reasons, the plaintiff’s lawsuit, which is based on abstract claims and bad faith and lacks legal grounds, must be dismissed.
LEGAL GROUNDS: TMK, TBK, HMK and all other relevant legislation.
EVIDENCE:
Population Records,
Land Registry Records,
Bank records,
Expert opinion,
Health Board Report,
Witnesses,
Oaths and all other legal evidence.
CONCLUSION: For the reasons explained above and to be considered ex officio, with our other legal rights and claims for excess amounts reserved;
We request that the Medical Board Report to be prepared be obtained from a fully equipped hospital deemed appropriate by your court, which has expertise in the relevant field,
that the unjust and legally unfounded lawsuit be DISMISSED,
and that the litigation costs and attorney’s fees be borne by the plaintiff.
Yours sincerely, /../..
Representative of the Restricted Candidate
Attorney