Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
11 07 48 2 • KG LU 11 07 48 2 Généré par l'IA

Property Owner Injunction Denial Over Building Height Restriction Interpretation

Numéro de cause 11 07 48 2
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Lucerne (CH-LU)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Frais judiciaires à la charge du recourant
Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The court upheld the dismissal of a request for an injunction against property owners seeking to construct a multi-story apartment building, which the neighboring property owner alleged violated existing building restriction easements recorded in the land register limiting construction to two stories plus an attic room. The court reasoned that interpreting the 1931 municipal building code, which was relevant to the easement's creation, indicated that the term "story" excluded basements that did not significantly protrude above ground level, and thus the proposed "first basement" level did not count toward the two-story limit, meaning the applicant failed to credibly demonstrate a violation of the stock limitation or the restriction to a single residential building, consistent with the principle of strictly interpreting servitudes.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 738 ZGB, Art. 18 Abs. 1 OR, Art. 292 StGB, Art. 101 über, § 10 Abs. 1 KoV, § 56 KoV; Property Owner Injunction Denial Over Building Height Restriction Interpretation: The court reasoned that interpreting the 1931 municipal building code, which was relevant to the easement's creation, indicated that the term "story" excluded basements that did not significantly protrude above ground level, and thus the proposed "first basement" level did not count toward the two-story limit, meaning the applicant failed to credibly demonstrate a violation of the stock limitation or the restriction to a single residential building, consistent with the principle of strictly interpreting servitudes.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
dépassement de la hauteur maximale droit de superficie restrictions de zonage registre foncier terrain communal expulsion d'un logement

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 738 ZGB
The court explicitly cited this article as part of the basis for interpreting the terms of the easement in relation to the building restrictions.
Art. 18 Abs. 1 OR
The court cited this article as the general principle for interpreting the easement contract.
Art. 292 StGB
Art. 101 über
§ 10 Abs. 1 KoV
Cited in the dispositive section for determining the court fee for the appeal.
§ 56 KoV
Cited in the dispositive section for setting the quantum of the lawyer's fee compensation awarded to the defendants.
Art. 95 ff. BGG
Cited in the dispositive section when specifying the grounds for appeal admissible before the Federal Supreme Court.
Art. 90 ff. BGG
Cited in the dispositive section when explaining the admissibility of the appeal in civil matters before the Federal Supreme Court.

Jurisprudence citée

Généré par l'IA
BGE 104 Ia 413
5C.78/2006
Servitude Continuation Following Land Division and Scope of Building Restriction
BGE 131 III 347
5C.240/2004
Interpretation of Building Servitude Regarding "Two-Story" Restriction
BGE 130 III 557
BGE 131 III 348
Généré par l'IA
V 08 304 2
Building Permit Appeal Regarding Attic Story and Ground Height Determination
7H 21 155
Appeal Allowed: Staggered Building Height Regulation Interpretation
V 04 204
Development Plan Height Restrictions Override Building Permit Authority
V 94 56
Developer/Municipality v. Administrative Authority over Building Permit Revocation and Height Restrictions
V 10 246 1
Appeal Regarding Building Permit Re-evaluation Due to Easement Agreements and Facade Height Calculation for Stepped Buildings

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 738 ZGB

The court explicitly cited this article as part of the basis for interpreting the terms of the easement in relation to the building restrictions.

Art. 18 Abs. 1 OR

The court cited this article as the general principle for interpreting the easement contract.

§ 10 Abs. 1 KoV

Cited in the dispositive section for determining the court fee for the appeal.

§ 56 KoV

Cited in the dispositive section for setting the quantum of the lawyer's fee compensation awarded to the defendants.

Art. 95 ff. BGG

Cited in the dispositive section when specifying the grounds for appeal admissible before the Federal Supreme Court.

Art. 90 ff. BGG

Cited in the dispositive section when explaining the admissibility of the appeal in civil matters before the Federal Supreme Court.

Art. 72 ff. BGG

Cited in the dispositive section regarding the admissibility of the appeal in civil matters before the Federal Supreme Court.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

Rechtsprechung Luzern

Instanz: · Obergericht Abteilung: · I. Kammer Rechtsgebiet: · Sachenrecht Entscheiddatum: · 23.05.2007 Fallnummer: · 11 07 48.2 LGVE: Leitsatz: · Art. 738 ZGB und Art. 18 Abs. 1 OR. Auslegung eines Dienstbarkeitsvertrages. Rechtskraft: · Diese Entscheidung ist rechtskräftig.