1. The subject of the dispute is an application for the establishment of guardianship over a legally incapacitated person and the appointment of a guardian.
2. The court of cassation overturned the decisions of the previous instances because the case was considered by the court of first instance in an incomplete composition, namely, by a judge sitting alone, instead of a panel consisting of one judge and two jurors, as provided by procedural law for cases on declaring a person legally incapacitated and establishing guardianship over them. The court noted that the issue of establishing guardianship and appointing a guardian is derivative from the issue of declaring a person legally incapacitated, and therefore must be considered by the same composition of the court. The court of appeal did not pay attention to this violation, which became the basis for the annulment of the decisions. The Court departed from the previous conclusion of the Supreme Court in case No. 760/16466/23, where the consideration of the case on the appointment of a guardian by a judge sitting alone was allowed.
3. The court of cassation overturned the decisions of the previous instances and sent the case for a new trial to the court of first instance.
