Legislator Case Law & Legislation
90.2001.109 • TRPI TI 90.2001.109 AI generated

Appeal Withdrawal Due to Mootness

Case Number 90.2001.109
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Switzerland · Canton of Ticino (CH-TI)
Decision Date
Outcome struck_off
Court Costs No costs imposed

Legislator summary

AI generated

A party filed an appeal on November 21, 2001, challenging the resolution of October 16, 2001, by which the executive council approved a municipality's regulatory plan. Subsequently, the representative of the appellant informed the court by letter on September 30, 2002, that they were withdrawing the appeal, leading the Territory Planning Tribunal to rule that the matter was moot and consequently strike the appeal from the roll without imposing any fees or costs.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

1. Il ricorso é stralciato dai ruoli, 2. Non si prelevano tasse e spese; Appeal Withdrawal Due to Mootness: Subsequently, the representative of the appellant informed the court by letter on September 30, 2002, that they were withdrawing the appeal, leading the Territory Planning Tribunal to rule that the matter was moot and consequently strike the appeal from the roll without imposing any fees or costs.

Keywords

AI generated
withdrawal of petition appealable interlocutory decision planning costs late procedural objections reconsideration of an earlier decision transfer rendered moot Sentenza o decisione senza scheda

Cited Legislation

AI generated
1. Il ricorso é stralciato dai ruoli
This is the main operative order, concluding the case due to the withdrawal of the appeal.
2. Non si prelevano tasse e spese
This is the order regarding costs, stating that no fees or expenses will be collected.
AI generated

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
1. Il ricorso é stralciato dai ruoli.

This is the main operative order, concluding the case due to the withdrawal of the appeal.

2. Non si prelevano tasse e spese.

This is the order regarding costs, stating that no fees or expenses will be collected.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Incarto n. 90.2001.00109 · Lugano 1 ottobre 2002 · In nome della Repubblica e Cantone del Ticino Il Tribunale della pianificazione del territorio

composto dai giudici: · Raffaello Balerna, presidente, Lorenzo Anastasi, Werner Walser

Il segretario · Fiorenzo Gianinazzi

statuendo sul ricorso del 21 novembre 2001 di

1. __________ __________, __________,

2. __________ __________, __________,

3. __________ __________, __________,

4. __________ __________, __________,

5. __________ __________, __________,

6. __________ __________, __________,

7. __________ __________, __________,

8. __________ __________, __________,

9. __________ __________, __________,

10. __________ __________,

1.,2.,3.,4.,5.,6.,7.,8.,9.,10. avv. __________. __________, __________ __________, contro

la risoluzione 16 ottobre 2001 no. __________con cui il Consiglio di Stato ha approvato il piano regolatore del comune di __________;

viste le osservazioni del Consiglio di Stato e del Comune di ;

letti ed esaminati gli atti;

visto che con lettera 30 settembre 2002 il rappresentante del ricorrente ha dichiarato di ritirare l’impugnativa;

rilevato che la causa é divenuta priva d’oggetto;

decreta

1. Il ricorso é stralciato dai ruoli.

2. Non si prelevano tasse e spese.

3. Intimazione a: · -

- Municipio di ________, ______ __________; ________ ____________

- Consiglio di Stato, ____________

- Sezione pianificazione urbanistica, ___________

Tribunale della pianificazione del territorio

Il presidente Il segretario