173.8 GTARLTAR

CH-VS

Art. 29 Gesetz betreffend den Tarif der Kosten und Entschädigungen vor Gerichts- oder Verwaltungsbehörden (GTar) - Honorar des Rechtsbeistands - Sonderfälle

Entschädigungen - Allgemeines

Originalquelle öffnen Gesamter Erlass (47 Artikel) Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Art. 29 GTar · Sonderfälle

1. In Fällen, die eine aussergewöhnliche Arbeit erforderten, insbesondere wenn sie teilweise ausserhalb der ordentlichen Arbeitsstunden ausgeführt werden musste, wenn die Beweismittel zahlreich und schwierig beizubringen oder zu koordinieren waren, das Dossier des Beweisverfahrens einen ganz besonderen Umfang annahm, die Rechts- und Sachverhaltsfragen heikel waren, der Rechtsbeistand mehrere Parteien vertreten musste oder sein Klient mehreren Parteien gegenüberstand, kann die Behörde als Honorar einen höheren Betrag gewähren, als im Tarif vorgesehen ist.

2. Wenn ein offensichtliches Missverhältnis zwischen Streitwert und Prozessinteresse der Parteien oder zwischen der Entschädigung gemäss vorliegendem Tarif und der effektiven Arbeit des Rechtsbeistands besteht, kann die Behörde das Honorar unter das erwähnte Minimum senken.

3. Im Falle des Prozessabstandes, des Beschwerderückzuges, des Säumnisurteils, des Vergleichs, des Nichteintretens und allgemein, wenn der Fall nicht durch ein Sachurteil endet, können die Honorare entsprechend gekürzt werden.

← Art. 28 GTar Gesetz betreffend den Tarif der Kosten und Entschädigungen vor Gerichts- oder Verwaltungsbehörden (GTar) - Anwendungsbereich Art. 30 GTar →

Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (97)

TCVS C1 16 238 · vs (Art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Insurer Reimbursement Claim in Plane Crash Case Rejected Despite Overcoming Prescription Period

Used to determine the amount of costs awarded to the successful party for the appeal procedure.

C1 25 101 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Cantonal Court Decision on Costs and Legal Fees After Federal Tribunal Ruling

Cited in determining the amount of legal fees for the first instance and appeal proceedings.

C1 25 104 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 1 und 2 GTar)

Father v. Child Protection Authority on Visitation and Procedural Delays

Cited regarding the possibility of increasing or decreasing the standard rates based on the lawyer's effort.

C1 25 53 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Remand of Cantonal Decision on Liquidator Removal Appeal Costs Apportionment

Cited in the reasoning regarding the reduction of legal fees for the subsequent procedure, which is reflected in the final amount awarded.

A1 24 19 · vs (art. 4, 29 al. 2 et 39 LTar)

Historic Property Demolition and Construction Authorization Challenge

Cited as the basis for calculating and imposing costs (attorney fees) on the appellants.

C1 24 38 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 GTar)

Withdrawal of Foreign Custody Enforcement and Denial of Legal Aid

Cited as a basis for reducing the fee when the case does not end with a merits decision (e.g., withdrawal).

C1 22 226 · vs (art. 27, 29 al. 2, 32 al. 1 et 35 al. 1 let. a LTar)

Traffic Accident Claim Timeliness Despite Prescription Claim

Cited in the reasoning for determining the amount of the attorney fees awarded to the appellee based on the tariff law.

C1 23 121 · vs (art. 29 al. 1 LTar)

Loan Repayment vs. Breach of Confidentiality Counterclaim

Cited as the basis for partially admitting the joint appeal and increasing the professional fees (dépens) awarded to the respondent for the first instance proceedings.

F1 24 138 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 et 39 LTar)

Taxpayer v. Cantonal Corporate Tax Commission (Timeliness of Corporate Tax Objection)

Cited in the reasoning (5.2) as part of the justification for setting the indemnity amount.

P1 24 69 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 GTar)

Cantonal Court Dismisses Defamation Appeal Due to Improper Submission

Applied to justify the proportional reduction of the court fee because the procedure ended at an early stage.

F1 24 105 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 et 39 LTar)

Cantonal Court Grants Lump-Sum Deduction for Privately Rented Box-Garages Following Federal Tribunal Annulment

Cited in the dispositive as part of the basis (LTar) for awarding costs to the appellant.

C1 22 61 · vs (Art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Employee Termination, Non-Compete Breach, and Penalty Reduction

Cited in the final order as a criterion for setting the appeal expenses.

P1 23 107 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 1 GTar)

Appeal Regarding Conviction, Sentence, and Damages in Attempted Rape and Drug Case

Used in the reasoning to assess whether the case warranted an exceptional fee for the defense counsel (Patrick Ruppen) in the first instance.

A1 23 67 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Notary Sanctioned for Breach of Professional Secrecy in Divorce Proceedings

Cited in the final order (8.3) when assessing the amount of legal costs awarded.

C1 23 55 · vs (art. 29 al. 2, 32 al. 1 et 35 al. 1 let. a LTar)

Appellant v. Company Regarding Unjustified Dismissal and Procedural Deficiencies

Cited in the reasoning to determine the amount of the appeal costs awarded.