Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
90.1998.117 • TRPI TI 90.1998.117 Généré par l'IA

Appeal Dismissed for Untimely Filing Beyond Statutory Thirty-Day Deadline

Numéro de cause 90.1998.117
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton du Tessin (CH-TI)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Irrecevable (Inadmissible)
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 dismissed an appeal filed on June 18, 1998, against a resolution intimated on April 6, 1998, because it was filed outside the statutory thirty-day deadline applicable to appeals against State Council decisions under Article 38 paragraph 1 of the relevant law (LALPT), noting that the appellant mistakenly believed the deadline was sixty days and that the judicial recess period did not suspend this specific deadline sufficiently to make the filing timely.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 38 cpv. 1 LALPT, Art. 13 LPamm, Non specificato; Appeal Dismissed for Untimely Filing Beyond Statutory Thirty-Day Deadline: The court dismissed an appeal filed on June 18, 1998, against a resolution intimated on April 6, 1998, because it was filed outside the statutory thirty-day deadline applicable to appeals against State Council decisions under Article 38 paragraph 1 of the relevant law (LALPT), noting that the appellant mistakenly believed the deadline was sixty days and that the judicial recess period did not suspend this specific deadline sufficiently to make the filing timely.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
dépôt tardif délai légal congé tardif forclusion pour tardiveté interruption de la prescription droit judiciaire Sentenza o decisione senza scheda

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 38 cpv. 1 LALPT
This article establishes the thirty-day deadline for filing an appeal against decisions of the State Council, which was the basis for declaring the appeal inadmissible due to being time-barred.
Art. 13 LPamm
This article regarding the suspension of deadlines due to judicial holidays was cited in the reasoning leading up to the procedural decision on inadmissibility.
Non specificato
The costs were imposed by order 2, but the specific article governing costs (e.g., Art. 66 LTF or equivalent cantonal norm) is not explicitly cited in that order.
Généré par l'IA
38.2018.71
Appeal Dismissed for Untimely Filing Due to Missed Deadline
30.2004.10
Appeal Dismissed for Untimely Filing
14.2015.79
Appeal Dismissed for Untimely Filing
16.2011.12
Appeal Dismissed for Untimely Filing
17.2004.52
Appeal Dismissed for Untimely Filing

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
art. 38 cpv. 1 LALPT

This article establishes the thirty-day deadline for filing an appeal against decisions of the State Council, which was the basis for declaring the appeal inadmissible due to being time-barred.

art. 13 LPamm

This article regarding the suspension of deadlines due to judicial holidays was cited in the reasoning leading up to the procedural decision on inadmissibility.

Non specificato

The costs were imposed by order 2, but the specific article governing costs (e.g., Art. 66 LTF or equivalent cantonal norm) is not explicitly cited in that order.

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

Incarto n. 90.98.00117 · Lugano 7 luglio 1998 · In nome della Repubblica e Cantone del Ticino Il Tribunale della pianificazione del territorio

composto dai giudici: · Efrem Beretta, presidente, Giovanna Roggero-Will, Michele Rusca

Il segretario · Fiorenzo Gianinazzi

visto il ricorso del 18 giugno 1998 di

__________ __________ __________ __________ __________, __________ __________, rappr. da: __________ __________ -__________, __________ __________ __________, contro

__________

ritenuto

in fatto e in diritto

che la contestata risoluzione è stata intimata alla ricorrente in data 6.4.98.

che a norma dell’art. 38 cpv. 1 LALPT contro le decisioni del Consiglio di Stato è dato ricorso al Tribunale della pianificazione del territorio entro trenta giorni dalla notificazione (e non 60 come erroneamente ritiene la ricorrente);

che questo termine è sospeso dalle ferie giudiziarie (7 giorni prima e dopo Pasqua giusta l’art. 13 LPamm);

che il ricorso, interposto il 18 giugno 1998 è largamente fuori termine e quindi irricevibile;

Per questi motivi,

dichiara e pronuncia

1. Il ricorso, tardivo, è irricevibile.

2. La ricorrente é condannata al pagamento delle tasse di giudizio di fr. 100.-

3. Intimazione: - __________ __________, __________ __________

- Municipio di ____________________

- Consiglio di Stato, __________

- Sezione pianificazione urbanistica, __________

Tribunale della pianificazione del territorio

Il presidente Il segretario