370.100
VRGLGA
CH-GR
CH-GR
Art. 43 Loi sur la justice administrative (VRG) - Composition
Procédure devant la Cour supérieure - Dispositions générales - Délibérations et prononcé du jugement
Art. 43 VRG · Composition
1. Le Tribunal cantonal statue généralement en formation de trois juges.
2. Il statue en formation de cinq juges sur
a) les recours contre les décisions du gouvernement ou du Grand Conseil;
b) les recours contre les actes législatifs;
c) * les questions de droit d'importance fondamentale;
d) * sur ordonnance du ou de la présidente.
3. Il statue en compétence d'un juge unique lorsque
a) * la valeur litigieuse n'excède pas 10 000 francs et qu'aucune formation de cinq juges n'est requise;
b) un recours est manifestement irrecevable ou manifestement fondé ou infondé.
4. Les affaires qui doivent être décidées en compétence d'un juge unique selon l'alinéa 3 peuvent être tranchées en formation de trois juges si le juge compétent l'ordonne.
Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (531)
VR1 2025 74 · gr (Art. 43 cpv. 3 lett. b LGA i.u. all’art. 38 cpv. 3 LOG [CSC 173.000])
Appeal Dismissed for Untimely Filing of Residence Permit Revocation Challenge
Cited as the legal basis allowing the single judge to decide the case because the appeal and the request for reinstatement were manifestly inadmissible/unfounded.
VR2 2025 56 · gr (Art. 43 Abs. 3 lit. b VRG)
Failure to Perfect Appeal Grounds and Procedural Diligence
Cited in the reasoning to establish the competence of the single judge for clearly inadmissible appeals, which is the outcome in order 1.
VR2 2025 56 · gr (Art. 43 Abs. 3 lit. b VRG)
Failure to Perfect Appeal Grounds and Procedural Diligence
Cited in the reasoning to justify the competence for a simplified decision regarding the inadmissibility in order 1.
VR2 2025 13 · gr (Art. 43 Abs. 3 lit. b VRG)
Appeal Dismissed for Late Filing: Property Gains Tax Deadline Based on Presumed Notification Date
Applied because the appeal was deemed inadmissible, leading to a decision by a single judge.
SV2 2025 39 · gr (art. 43 cpv. 3 lit. b LGA)
Social Insurance Objection Timeliness Appeal Review Limitation
Cited as the legal basis for judging the case as a single judge because the appeal was manifestly inadmissible or unfounded.
SV2 2025 39 · gr (art. 61 ingresso LPGA i.c.d. con l'art. 43 cpv. 3 lit. b LGA)
Social Insurance Objection Timeliness Appeal Review Limitation
Cited as the legal basis for judging the case as a single judge because the appeal was manifestly inadmissible or unfounded.
VR3 2025 72 · gr (art. 43 cpv. 3 lett. b LGA)
Appeal Dismissed for Non-Payment of Advance on Costs in Watercourse Regulation Dispute
Cited in the reasoning section concerning the judge's power to decide as a single judge when a remedy is manifestly inadmissible, which underlies the decision to declare the appeal inadmissible.
VR2 2025 47 · gr (Art. 43 Abs. 3 lit. a und b VRG)
Municipal Fine Appeal Jurisdiction Challenge
Cited to establish the single-judge competence due to the non-admissibility and low value of the appeal.
SV2 2025 23 · gr (art. 61 ingresso LPGA i.c.d. con l'art. 43 cpv. 3 lit. a LGA)
Former Company Officer Liable for Unpaid Social Insurance Contributions
Cited to justify the application of the simplified procedure by the sole judge because the value in dispute was below CHF 10,000.00.
VR1 2025 31 · gr (art. 43 cpv. 3 lett. b LGA)
Municipal Budget Approval Timeliness Challenge
Used to rule that the appeal is manifestly inadmissible because the Court is judging it as a single judge due to manifest inadmissibility.
VR1 2024 1008 · gr (Art. 43 Abs. 3 lit. b VRG)
Municipality vs. Property Owner on Special Road Assessment Procedure
Cited in the reasoning as the basis for the single-judge decision due to the appeal being obviously unfounded, which is implicitly reflected in the dispositive by proceeding to a ruling.
SV1 2025 18 · gr (art. 61 cpv. 1 LPGA i.u. all’art. 43 cpv. 3 lett. b LGA)
Late Disability Benefits Appeal Dismissed Due to Insufficient Proof of Timely Filing
Cited to justify the decision of the sole judge in ruling on the inadmissible appeal.
VR2 2025 7 · gr (art. 43 cpv. 3 i.c.d. con l'art. 85 cpv. 2 LGA [CSC 370.100])
Taxpayer v. Tax Administration Regarding Refusal to Rectify Final Assessments Based on Newly Discovered Evidence
Cited for the decision to judge the appeal as a single judge because the appeal was manifestly ill-founded.
VR3 2023 47 · gr (Art. 43 Abs. 2 lit. a VRG)
Appeal Against Partial Revision of Local Development Plan for Hotel Resort Expansion
Cited to confirm the functional jurisdiction (composition of the court).
VR2 2025 14 · gr (Art. 43 Abs. 3 lit. b VRG)
Company's Appeal on Tax Evasion Fine Inadmissible Due to Improper Procedure
Used to establish the single-judge competence based on the appeal being clearly inadmissible.