Legislator Case Law & Legislation
143.1 VRPG CH-AR

Art. 8 Act on Administrative Justice (VRPG) - Recusal

Section 1: General Provisions
Open official source Full Act (58 Articles) Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Art. 8 VRPG · Recusal

1. Persons who have to make or prepare a decision must recuse themselves

a) if they have a personal interest in the matter;

abis) if they are related or connected to a party in a direct line or up to the third degree in a collateral line, or are related by marriage, registered partnership, or de facto domestic partnership;

b) if they have already participated in a preliminary decision;

c) if they represent a party or have previously acted for a party in the same matter;

d) if they have a significant interest in the outcome concerning a legal entity;

e) if they could be biased in the matter for other reasons.

2. If the recusal is disputed, the decision is made by

- in the case of members and the secretary or the actuary of a collegial authority, this authority excluding the person affected;

- in individual cases, by the appellate authority;

- in the case of a single judge of the higher court, by the higher court itself.

3. If the quorum of an authority is challenged as a result of a recusal request, the decision on the disputed recusal is made

a) for the municipal council, by the government council;

b) for the government council, by the higher court;

c) ...

4. Article 47 letter e of the Judicial Act applies to the higher court.

← Art. 7 VRPG - d) Suspension of Deadlines Act on Administrative Justice (VRPG) - Scope of Application Art. 9 VRPG →

Need to analyze how this provision applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this statute against case law, commentaries, and related legislative provisions inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Court Decisions Applying This Provision (10)

Verwaltung ARGVP 202 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 3 lit. a VRPG)
Municipal Council Recusal Challenge and Quorum Determination
Cited to establish the Government Council's jurisdiction to decide on the challenged abstention request because the council's quorum was questioned.
OG O4V 19 34 ARGVP 2 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 1 lit. d VRPG)
Municipal Executive Recused from Stock Corporation Administrative Proceedings Due to Objective Bias Risk
The member of the municipal executive was deemed personally biased under this provision due to his position on the board of directors of the company concerned.
OG O4V 19 34 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 1 lit. d VRPG)
Planning Zone Challenge Based on Council Member's Dual Role and Apparent Bias
The court found the council president personally biased according to this provision.
OG O4V 19 36 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 1 lit. d VRPG)
Appeal Regarding Planning Zone Imposition Due to Official's Conflict of Interest
Cited in the reasoning leading to the conclusion that the municipal president was personally biased, which formed the basis for the annulment of the prior decisions.
OG O4V 19 38 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 1 lit. d VRPG)
Property Owners v. Municipal Council Over Planning Zone Decision Due to Conflict of Interest
The court found the municipal president personally biased in the sense of this provision regarding the decision.
OG O4V 19 40 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 1 lit. d VRPG)
Planning Zone Challenge Based on Municipal President's Conflict of Interest
Used to establish that C. ______ was personally biased in the preliminary decision (Einspracheverfahren) based on his interest as a member of the board of D. ______.
OG O4V 19 17 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 1 lit. b VRPG)
Application for Recusal of Court Clerk Based on Prior Administrative Role Dismissed
This provision defines the grounds for recusation, specifically participation in the prior decision, which was central to the applicant's motion.
OG O4V 19 17 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 1 lit. e VRPG)
Application for Recusal of Court Clerk Based on Prior Administrative Role Dismissed
This general catch-all provision for potential bias was examined as an alternative ground for recusation.
OG O4V 17 27 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 2 VRPG)
Motion to Disqualify High Court Vice President Denied Due to Lack of Objective Evidence of Bias
Cited in the reasoning as the procedural rule determining which authority decides on the abstention request, which is the basis for the court's jurisdiction.
O4V 23 7 · ar (Art. 8 Abs. 1 lit. e VRPG)
Veterinary Inspector Recusal Challenge Dismissed Due to Untimely Filing and Improper Appeal Structure
Mentioned in reasoning regarding the scope of the partial withdrawal, but not explicitly used in the final orders.