Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
II 2025 15 • VG SZ II 2025 15 KI-generiert

Liquidator v. Public Works Authority Regarding Compensatory Charge

Geschäftsnummer II 2025 15
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Schweiz · Kanton Schwyz (CH-SZ)
Entscheiddatum
Originalquelle öffnen Entscheidsuche-Spiegel Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

A company in liquidation appealed a decision regarding a compensatory charge (benefit contribution) levied by the public works authority. The court held that the imposition of the benefit contribution was lawful because the relevant cantonal law permitted such a levy for specific public infrastructure projects, and the appellant, as the direct beneficiary of the infrastructure improvements funded by the charge, was correctly assessed, regardless of the company's subsequent liquidation status.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Liquidator v. Public Works Authority Regarding Compensatory Charge: The court held that the imposition of the benefit contribution was lawful because the relevant cantonal law permitted such a levy for specific public infrastructure projects, and the appellant, as the direct beneficiary of the infrastructure improvements funded by the charge, was correctly assessed, regardless of the company's subsequent liquidation status.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Ersatzabgabe öffentlich-rechtliche Leistung Öffentliche Arbeiten Begünstigtenstellung Liquidation der GmbH Insolvenzentschädigung Kausalabgaben (Vorteilsabgabe) | Kausalabgaben
KI-generiert
II 2019 96
Company v. Civil Engineering Office Regarding Benefit Levy for Reconstruction
III 2017 27
Social Assistance Recipient v. State Agency Regarding Asset Liquidation Condition
III 2017 176
Appeal Regarding Expropriation Compensation Valuation
II 2024 11
Construction Company Benefit Levy Challenge
ZK1 2021 26
Dismissal of Appeal Due to Corporate Liquidation and Claim Recognition in Insolvency Proceedings

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 2025 15 |\n |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 23. Juni 2025 |\n \n\n

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

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n Dr.iur. Vital Zehnder, Präsident |\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.________GmbH in Liquidation, \n Beschwerdeführerin, |\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 (Vorteilsabgabe) |\n \n\n

\n \n

Sachverhalt: