Determination of Torts of Absconding from Custody and Liability

Irrespective of whether guardianship is conceptualised as a duty or a right, the external consequences of the relationship are definitive, and violations thereof are governed by the regulations set forth in the Tort Liability Section of the Civil Code. The term “tortfeasor” encompasses both the individual who initiates the removal of the ward from guardianship and any subsequent actor, such as the purchaser, who perpetuates the removal. This hypothetical reason does not serve to diminish the liability for damages of the subsequent actor, even in instances where other acts may serve to perpetuate the removal of the ward from guardianship. A fiduciary guardian who has not acted in breach of duty is not liable for torts. In addition to the identity interests of the guardian, removal from guardianship is also detrimental to the personality interests of the ward. This is evidenced by the case of a child who has been betrayed by their biological parents, who may claim damages for infringement of their personality rights. In the case of a tort of removal from guardianship, the scope of damages encompasses those that continue to arise after the ward has reached the age of majority. In such instances, the ordinary statute of limitations applies to the right to claim damages. The subject of a claim for moral damages should not be limited to parents and other close relatives; non-close guardians may also claim such damages.