The person who is in charge of the simple administration of the property of others must do only acts that aim at preserving the entrusted property and at maintaining its use: he has, for example, to collect the income generated by the property or to continue its exploitation, but he has no power to dispose of such property or to encroach on the capital, except with an authorization to do so.
The person who is in charge of the full administration of the property of others is required to preserve the entrusted property and to make it grow, but he has the power to dispose of the property and do any useful and necessary act to fulfill his obligations as administrator.
In both cases, the administrator of the property of others is required to act carefully and with diligence in the best interest of the beneficiary. He cannot use for his personal benefit the property which is entrusted to him, except with an authorization to do so.
Regarding the protective supervision, the type of administration depends on the degree of incapacity of the person concerned. Thus, the curator appointed by the court has the powers of full administration, while the tutor has only the powers of simple administration. One and the other will have to render account of their administration to the tutorship council. The adviser, as for him, has no power of administration of the property.
Regarding the protection mandate in case of incapacity, it is the person who gives the protection mandate who is going to specify the powers of administration that he intends to entrust his mandatary. In case of doubt about the scope of the protection mandate, it must be interpreted as a simple administration of the property of others. If the powers of administration that it confers are insufficient, the protection mandate can be completed by a protective supervision.
This browser does not support this kind of file. Please download the file to view it: Download the file