Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
II 2024 42 • VG SZ II 2024 42 KI-generiert

Property Owners v. Municipality (Development Charges Limitation Period)

Geschäftsnummer II 2024 42
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Schweiz · Kanton Schwyz (CH-SZ)
Entscheiddatum

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

Property owners appealed a municipal decision imposing development charges, arguing the claim was time-barred because the underlying authorization had been granted years prior and the development charges were levied after the statutory limitation period had expired. The court determined that the limitation period for imposing such charges begins when the decision granting the construction permit becomes legally binding, and since the administrative act establishing the basis for the charge (the authorization) was finalized before the applicable statute of limitations expired, the claim for the advantage-based development charge was not time-barred and thus upheld the imposition.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Property Owners v. Municipality (Development Charges Limitation Period): The court determined that the limitation period for imposing such charges begins when the decision granting the construction permit becomes legally binding, and since the administrative act establishing the basis for the charge (the authorization) was finalized before the applicable statute of limitations expired, the claim for the advantage-based development charge was not time-barred and thus upheld the imposition.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Fristen Erschliessungsbeiträge gesetzliche Grundlage Bauträger Erschliessung des Grundstücks Baubeschränkungsdienstbarkeit Kausalabgaben (Vorteilsabgaben; Verjährung) | Kausalabgaben
KI-generiert

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n II 2024 42 |\n |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 28. August 2024 |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n Dr.iur. Vital Zehnder, Vizepräsident |\n \n|\n |\n Dr.oec. Andreas Risi, Richter Dr.iur. Frank Lampert, Richter |\n \n|\n |\n Dr.iur. Thomas Twerenbold, Gerichtsschreiber |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Parteien |\n A.A.________ und B.A.________, \n Beschwerdeführer, \n vertreten durch … |\n \n|\n |\n gegen |\n \n|\n |\n Tiefbauamt, Postfach 1251, 6431 Schwyz, \n Vorinstanz, |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Gegenstand |\n Kausalabgaben (Vorteilsabgaben; Verjährung) |\n \n\n

\n \n

Sachverhalt: