Appeal Against Provisional Road Traffic Seizure Order
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe case concerns an appeal against a provisional seizure order issued by the traffic authority concerning road traffic law. The appellant sought the reversal of this order, which was presumably enacted due to a safety concern or infraction related to driving. The court, in its decision, upheld the provisional measure, reasoning that the factual basis provided by the authority supported the necessity of the immediate protective measure against the appellant, thereby justifying the initial seizure order in the interest of public safety on the roads.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiertAppeal Against Provisional Road Traffic Seizure Order: The appellant sought the reversal of this order, which was presumably enacted due to a safety concern or infraction related to driving. The court, in its decision, upheld the provisional measure, reasoning that the factual basis provided by the authority supported the necessity of the immediate protective measure against the appellant, thereby justifying the initial seizure order in the interest of public safety on the roads.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertVolltext
\n \n \n \n \n
\n\n| | | |\n III 2020 70 |\n |\n \n\n
\n \n \n \n \n
\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 18. Juni 2020 |\n \n\n
\n \n \n \n
\n\n| | |
|\n Besetzung |\n lic.iur. Gion Tomaschett, Vizepräsident Ruth Mikšovic-Waldis, Richterin Monica Huber-Landolt, Richterin |\n
\n|\n |\n MLaw Aaron Steiner, a.o. Gerichtsschreiber |\n \n|\n |\n |\n \n\n
\n \n \n \n \n \n
\n\n| | |
|\n Parteien |\n A.________, …, \n Beschwerdeführer, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt B.________, \n B.________, , |\n
\n|\n |\n gegen |\n \n|\n |\n Verkehrsamt, Schlagstrasse 82, B.________ 3214, 6431 Schwyz, \n Vorinstanz, |\n \n\n
\n \n \n \n \n \n
\n\n| | | |\n Gegenstand |\n Strassenverkehrsrecht (vorsorglicher Sicherungsentzug) |\n \n\n
\n \n
Sachverhalt: