Dispositive Model of Active Legal Capacity of People with Mental Disabilities in France and Quebec in the Context of the Russian Civil Code Reform (Part II)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to the problem of the inconsistency of the Russian imperative model of active legal capacity, according to which the content of active legal capacity in case of its restriction due to mental disability of a person is prescribed by the law, to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities ratified by Russia in 2012. The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate the shortcomings of the imperative model, the main of which is the lack of authority of the Russian court to individually determine the consequences of restriction of active legal capacity of a person due to mental disorder, taking in account degree of actual decrease of his cognitive and volitional abilities. This purpose is achieved by the consistent implementation of the following tasks. First of all, characteristic of the Russian imperative model of active legal capacity is given. Secondly, the French dispositive model of legal capacity is described. In this model the forms of legal protection, but not the categories of active legal capacity, incapacitation and restricted active legal capacity are the backbone concepts for the legal regulation of this group of relationship. It is noted that under the influence of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities the more progressive, from the point of view of international law, forms of this model are stipulated in many foreign countries. Thirdly, the evolved form of the French dispositive model of active legal capacity, implemented in the Bill 18 «An Act to amend the Civil Code, the Code of Civil Procedure, the Public Curator Act and various provisions as regards the protection of persons», that was adopted by the National Assembly of Quebec in 2 June 2020, is analyzed. The main advantage of the latter is that the court, establishing the form of protection, is not bound by the legal norms that imperatively determine the content of active legal capacity of a person with mental disorder. The court is able, based on the cognitive and volitional abilities of particular person, to individually determine which acts person can perform by himself, alone or with the assistance of the tutor, and which one can be performed by the tutor only. The objectives of the study determine the leading role of the comparative legal method in its implementation. The provided research makes possible to assess the perspectives of borrowing of French or Quebec dispositive models of active legal capacity of people with mental disorder by the Russian legislator.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".