Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
90.2001.25 • TRPI TI 90.2001.25 AI generated

Appeal Withdrawal Due to Mootness

Case Number 90.2001.25
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Switzerland · Canton of Ticino (CH-TI)
Decision Date
Outcome struck_off
Court Costs No costs imposed
Open official source Entscheidsuche mirror Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

A party filed an appeal on April 12, 2001, challenging a State Council resolution that approved a detailed development plan for a municipality's area. However, the court noted that the appellant's representative declared the withdrawal of the appeal via a letter dated May 21, 2002, leading the court to determine that the case was moot. Consequently, the Planning Tribunal ordered the appeal to be struck from the roll, with no taxes or expenses to be levied.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

2. Non si prelevano tasse e spese; Appeal Withdrawal Due to Mootness: However, the court noted that the appellant's representative declared the withdrawal of the appeal via a letter dated May 21, 2002, leading the court to determine that the case was moot. Consequently, the Planning Tribunal ordered the appeal to be struck from the roll, with no taxes or expenses to be levied.

Keywords

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

Cited Legislation

AI generated
2. Non si prelevano tasse e spese
This order rules on the collection of costs by stating that no taxes or expenses are levied.
AI generated
90.2001.109
Appeal Withdrawal Due to Mootness
90.2001.23
Withdrawal of Appeal on Mootness Grounds
90.1995.55
Withdrawal of Appeal Due to Mootness
90.1999.22
Appeal Withdrawal Due to Mootness
90.2001.22
Appeal Withdrawn: Moot Case Dismissal

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
2. Non si prelevano tasse e spese.

This order rules on the collection of costs by stating that no taxes or expenses are levied.

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. 90.2001.00025 · Lugano 27 maggio 2002 · In nome della Repubblica e Cantone del Ticino Il Tribunale della pianificazione del territorio composto dai giudici: · Efrem Beretta, presidente, Lorenzo Anastasi, Raffaello Balerna Il segretario · Fiorenzo Gianinazzi statuendo sul ricorso del 12 aprile 2001 di __________ __________ __________ SA, __________, rappr. da: avv. __________ __________, __________ __________, contro la risoluzione __________ marzo 2001 (n° __________) del Consiglio di Stato, che approva il piano particolareggiato di Via __________ __________ (__________) del comune di __________;

viste le osservazioni 3 luglio 2001 del Consiglio

di Stato e 31 agosto 2001 del Comune di __________ ;

letti ed esaminati gli atti;

visto che con lettera 21 maggio 2002 il rappresentante

della 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: · - avv. __________ __________, __________

- Municipio di __________ - avv. __________ __________, __________ - avv. __________ __________, __________ per __________ __________ - avv. __________ __________, __________ per __________. __________ __________ e __________. __________ __________ - _________ SA c/o _________ Fiduciaria SA, _________

- Consiglio di Stato, Bellinzona

- Sezione pianificazione urbanistica, Bellinzona

Tribunale della pianificazione del territorio

Il presidente Il

segretario