Removed by (Act No. 45 of 2026)
Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 89, paragraph (1) (including as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 96, paragraph (1) and Article 98, paragraph (1)), in an adjudication case for the commission of, or the rescission or change of the commission of, delivery of a postal item, etc. addressed to an adult under guardianship, the court in charge of an appeal is not required to hear statements of a person engaged in the correspondence delivery service.
成年被後見人に宛てた郵便物等の配達の嘱託等の審判事件においては、第八十九条第一項の規定（第九十六条第一項及び第九十八条第一項において準用する場合を含む。）にかかわらず、抗告裁判所は、信書の送達の事業を行う者の陳述を聴くことを要しない。
Read this with the articles around it
adjudication case for the commission of, or the rescission or change of the commission of, delivery of a postal item, etc. addressed to an adult under guardianshipmachine translation
「成年被後見人に宛てた郵便物等の配達の嘱託等の審判事件」
A case in which the family court decides whether to ask a correspondence delivery business to deliver mail or correspondence items (郵便物等) addressed to an adult ward (成年被後見人) to the guardian of an adult (成年後見人) instead, or to revoke or change that request — the matter in row 12-2 of Appended Table 1 (別表第一).
Short name set inArticle 118, paragraph (1), item (viii)· applies only in this provision and in Article 123-2