Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VR.2024.00003 • VG ZH VR.2024.00003 AI generated

Expropriation Compensation Valuation Dispute on Developed Land

Case Number VR.2024.00003
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Switzerland · Canton of Zurich (CH-ZH)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Court Costs Borne by public authority
Open official source Entscheidsuche mirror Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court addressed an appeal concerning the compensation awarded for the formal partial expropriation of a strip of land within the building line area for a road project, where the dispute centered on the proper valuation method and the deductibility of certain land features. The court determined that the subject property qualified as developed land and held that the comparable sales method was the appropriate basis for determining compensation, rejecting the appellant's proposed "backward calculation" method; further, it upheld the legality of a one-third deduction for front garden land but found the private valuation reports insufficient to seriously challenge the estimation commission's findings. Finally, the court denied compensation for party or expense reimbursement related to the private expert opinion but ruled that the appellant was unlawfully charged half of the estimation costs, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeal.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 26 Abs. II BV, Art. 114 Abs. I EntG, Art. 114 Abs. II EntG, § 17 Abs. II VRG, § 50 Abs. I VRG; Expropriation Compensation Valuation Dispute on Developed Land: The court determined that the subject property qualified as developed land and held that the comparable sales method was the appropriate basis for determining compensation, rejecting the appellant's proposed "backward calculation" method; further, it upheld the legality of a one-third deduction for front garden land but found the private valuation reports insufficient to seriously challenge the estimation commission's findings. Finally, the court denied compensation for party or expense reimbursement related to the private expert opinion but ruled that the appellant was unlawfully charged half of the estimation costs, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeal.

Keywords

AI generated
compensation for expropriation building property developing areas subdivision of land valuation proceedings cost calculation

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 26 Abs. II BV
I AbtrG Art. 26 Abs. II BV Art.
Art. 114 Abs. I EntG
II BV Art. 114 Abs. I EntG Art.
Art. 114 Abs. II EntG
I EntG Art. 114 Abs. II EntG § 99 Abs.
§ 17 Abs. II VRG
This provision was applied to impose costs related to the partial acceptance of the appeal.
§ 50 Abs. I VRG
This provision was cited in relation to the non-award of party compensation in the dispositive.
AI generated
VR.2012.00003
Expropriation Compensation and Sidewalk Contributions Dispute
VR.2021.00002
Expropriation Compensation Valuation for Road Setback and Surface
VR.2013.00001
Expropriation Compensation Appeal Regarding Road Project Valuation and Procedural Challenges
VR.2013.00005
Land Expropriation Compensation Appeal: Valuation and Cost Allocation Upheld
VR.2000.00005
Expropriation Compensation Valuation and Jurisdiction on Appeal

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 17 Abs. II VRG

This provision was applied to impose costs related to the partial acceptance of the appeal.

§ 50 Abs. I VRG

This provision was cited in relation to the non-award of party compensation in the dispositive.

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

Verwaltungsgericht des Kantons Zürich: VR.2024.00003

--- · --- · --- · --- · --- · [Standard Suche](/findinfo/xhtmltemplates/standard.htm) · [Erweiterte Suche](/findinfo/xhtmltemplates/advanced.htm) · [Hilfe](/findinfo/help/index.htm)

[Druckansicht](/cgi-bin/nph-omniscgi.exe?OmnisPlatform=WINDOWS&WebServerUrl=&WebServerScript=/cgi-bin/nph-omniscgi.exe&OmnisLibrary=JURISWEB&OmnisClass=rtFindinfoWebHtmlService&OmnisServer=JURISWEB,127.0.0.1:7000&Parametername=WWW&Schema=ZH_VG_WEB&Source=&Aufruf=getDocument&cSprache=GER&nF30_KEY=225037&W10_KEY=13317002&nTrefferzeile=1&Template=standard/results/printviewdocument.fiw)

--- · --- · --- · Geschäftsnummer: · VR.2024.00003 · Entscheidart und -datum: · Endentscheid vom 12.06.2025 · Spruchkörper: · 3. Abteilung/3. Kammer · Weiterzug: · Dieser Entscheid ist rechtskräftig. · Rechtsgebiet: · Enteignungsrecht · Betreff: · formelle Teilenteignung · [Teilenteignung eines Landstreifens im Baulinienbereich für ein Strassenprojekt] Qualifizierung als überbautes Grundstück; Vergleichswertmethode massgebend und nicht Rückwärtsrechnung (E. 4.3). 1/3 Abzug für Vorgartenland ist rechtmässig (E. 4.4). Private Schätzungsgutachten stellen Entschädigungsbemessung der Schätzungskommission nicht ernsthaft in Frage (E. 4.5).

Keine Parteientschädigung und keine Aufwandsentschädigung (für das Privatgutachten) im Schätzungsverfahren (E. 5). Schätzungskosten wurden unrechtmässig zur Hälfte der Rekurrentin auferlegt (E. 6). Teilgutheissung. · --- · Stichworte: · AUGENSCHEIN BAULINIENBEREICH EIGENTUMSGARANTIE FORMELLE ENTEIGNUNG KOGNITION KOSTENERSATZ KOSTENTRAGUNG PARTEIENTSCHÄDIGUNG PRIVATGUTACHTEN RÜCKWÄRTSRECHNUNG SCHÄTZUNGSERMESSEN SCHÄTZUNGSMETHODE ÜBERBAUTES GEBIET VERGLEICHSMETHODE VORGARTENLAND · Rechtsnormen: · § 11 AbtrG § 13 Abs. I AbtrG § 63 Abs. I AbtrG § 64 Abs. I AbtrG Art. 26 Abs. II BV Art. 114 Abs. I EntG Art. 114 Abs. II EntG § 99 Abs. I PBG § 240 Abs. I PBG § 17 Abs. I VRG § 17 Abs. II VRG § 50 Abs. I VRG · Publikationen:

· - keine - · Gewichtung: (1 von hoher / 5 von geringer Bedeutung) · Gewichtung: 3