Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
15.1999.67 • TRAC TI 15.1999.67 KI-generiert

Appeal Struck Due to Withdrawal

Geschäftsnummer 15.1999.67
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Schweiz · Kanton Tessin (CH-TI)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang struck_off
Kostenauflage keine Kosten erhoben
Originalquelle öffnen Entscheidsuche-Spiegel Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

A party filed an appeal against the enforcement office's action concerning a seizure order issued in an execution proceeding initiated by another party. The appellate court noted that the appellant subsequently withdrew the filed appeal through written communication, rendering the matter moot. Consequently, the court struck the appeal from the rolls, determined no costs or indemnities would be levied, and specified the deadline and method for further recourse to the Federal Tribunal.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Art. 20a cpv. 1 primo, Art. 19 LEF, art. 20a cpv. 1 primo periodo LEF, art. 61 cpv. 2 lett. a OTLEF, art. 62 cpv. 2 OTLEF; Appeal Struck Due to Withdrawal: The appellate court noted that the appellant subsequently withdrew the filed appeal through written communication, rendering the matter moot. Consequently, the court struck the appeal from the rolls, determined no costs or indemnities would be levied, and specified the deadline and method for further recourse to the Federal Tribunal.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Klagerückzug Zulassung der Zwangsvollstreckung Reihenfolge der Pfändung gesetzliche Verfahrensfrist Beschwerdelegitimation verwaltungsrechtlicher Widerruf Sentenza o decisione senza scheda

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
Art. 20a cpv. 1 primo
richiamati gli art. 20a cpv. 1 primo periodo LEF, 61 cpv.
Art. 19 LEF
This provision governs the possibility of appealing the decision to the Federal Supreme Court.
art. 20a cpv. 1 primo periodo LEF
This provision seems to be mentioned in the context leading to the withdrawal and subsequent striking of the case from the roll, though the specific procedural consequence in order 1 is not explicitly tied to it.
art. 61 cpv. 2 lett. a OTLEF
This provision is referenced in the preamble to the decision, likely related to the court's competence or procedure.
art. 62 cpv. 2 OTLEF
This provision is referenced in the preamble to the decision, likely related to the court's competence or procedure.
KI-generiert
15.2000.68
Appeal Struck Due to Withdrawal
15.2023.10
Withdrawal of Appeal Against Enforcement Seizure Order
15.2000.148
Appeal Struck Due to Withdrawal
15.1998.00065
Appeal Dismissed Upon Withdrawal in Seizure Order Challenge
15.1999.180
Withdrawal of Appeal Against Seizure Order

Zentrale Rechtsfragen, extrahiert von Legislator

KI-generiert
art. 20a cpv. 1 primo periodo LEF

This provision seems to be mentioned in the context leading to the withdrawal and subsequent striking of the case from the roll, though the specific procedural consequence in order 1 is not explicitly tied to it.

art. 61 cpv. 2 lett. a OTLEF

This provision is referenced in the preamble to the decision, likely related to the court's competence or procedure.

art. 62 cpv. 2 OTLEF

This provision is referenced in the preamble to the decision, likely related to the court's competence or procedure.

art. 19 LEF

This provision governs the possibility of appealing the decision to the Federal Supreme Court.

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

Incarto n. 15.99.00067 · Lugano 30 aprile 1999 /FP/fc/kc · In nome della Repubblica e Cantone del Ticino La Camera di esecuzione e fallimenti del Tribunale d'appello quale autorità di vigilanza

composta dei giudici: · Cometta, presidente, Pellegrini e Zali

segretaria: · Baur Martinelli, vicecancelliera statuendo sul ricorso 15 aprile 1999 di

__________ (rappr. dall’avv. __________) contro

l’operato dell’UEF di Mendrisio e meglio contro l’avviso di pignoramento 12 aprile 1999 nell’esecuzione n. __________ UE Lugano promossa nei confronti della ricorrente da

__________

richiamata l’ordinanza presidenziale 22 aprile 1999, con la quale al ricorso non è stato concesso l’effetto sospensivo;

preso atto che con scritto 27 aprile 1999 l’avv. __________ ha ritirato il ricorso inoltrato a nome di __________;

considerato come il gravame sia così divenuto privo d’oggetto;

richiamati gli art. 20a cpv. 1 primo periodo LEF, 61 cpv. 2 lett. a e 62 cpv. 2 OTLEF pronuncia: 1. Il ricorso 15 aprile 1999 __________ è stralciato dai ruoli per intervenuto ritiro.

2. Non si prelevano spese, né si assegnano indennità.

3. Contro questa decisione è dato ricorso entro dieci giorni alla Camera delle esecuzioni e dei fallimenti del Tribunale federale a Losanna, per il tramite della scrivente Camera di esecuzione e fallimenti del Tribunale d’appello, in conformità dell’art. 19 LEF.

4. Intimazione a:

– __________

Comunicazione all’UEF di Mendrisio.

Per la Camera di esecuzione e fallimenti del Tribunale d’appello quale autorità di vigilanza

Il presidente La segretaria