Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
VR.2020.00003 • VG ZH VR.2020.00003 Generato dall'IA

Remand for Further Factual Investigation of Road Construction Damages

Numero d'incarto VR.2020.00003
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Svizzera · Canton Zurigo (CH-ZH)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Parzialmente accolto (Partially Allowed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Archivio Entscheidsuche Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The court remanded the case regarding formal expropriation for damages after road construction back to the appraisal commission for further factual investigation. The commission had erred by assuming the vibrations from the construction were below established guidelines without sufficient evidence. The court emphasized the need to thoroughly examine the nature and severity of the damages, consider the overall damage pattern, and assess if excessive vibrations caused them, including the property's susceptibility to damage and any pre-existing conditions. The benefit of the road construction alone does not justify a significant reduction or exclusion of compensation, and the standard for damages in such cases is analogous to the private law concept of excessiveness, requiring that vibrations exceed what properties with increased sensitivity typically withstand and that damages go beyond minor issues.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Art. 93 BGG, Art. 685 ZGB, § 35 AbtrG, § 41 Abs. II AbtrG, § 15 Abs. I AbtrG, § 15 Abs. II AbtrG; Remand for Further Factual Investigation of Road Construction Damages: The commission had erred by assuming the vibrations from the construction were below established guidelines without sufficient evidence. The court emphasized the need to thoroughly examine the nature and severity of the damages, consider the overall damage pattern, and assess if excessive vibrations caused them, including the property's susceptibility to damage and any pre-existing conditions. The benefit of the road construction alone does not justify a significant reduction or exclusion of compensation, and the standard for damages in such cases is analogous to the private law concept of excessiveness, requiring that vibrations exceed what properties with increased sensitivity typically withstand and that damages go beyond minor issues.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
costruzione stradale indennità d'espropriazione accertamenti complementari quantificazione del danno proprietà privata proporzionalità

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Art. 93 BGG
The court refers to this article in the context of the proceedings, likely related to the admissibility or procedure of the appeal after a remand from the Federal Supreme Court.
Art. 685 ZGB
The court cites this article in relation to the civil law concept of "excessiveness" applied to damages.
§ 35 AbtrG
Forms the basis for the court's decision regarding the expropriation process and the assessment of damages.
§ 41 Abs. II AbtrG
Cited in relation to the binding nature of the superior court's decision upon remand.
§ 15 Abs. I AbtrG
Relevant for the court's determination on the extent of damages and the causal link to road construction work.
§ 15 Abs. II AbtrG
Used by the court in assessing the admissibility of damages and the principle of proportionality in expropriation cases.
§ 17 VRG
This provision is foundational for the administrative court's review and reassessment of the case.
§ 20 Abs. I lit. b VRG
Applied by the court in its procedural decisions regarding the handling of the case and potential retrials or remands.
Generato dall'IA
VR.2018.00001
Expropriation for Property Damage Caused by Construction Vibrations
VR.2016.00002
Expropriation Claim for Road Construction Damage: Timeliness of Appeal and Excessive Impact Threshold
RU110028
Construction Damage Claim Remanded for Clarification on Liability and Fact-Finding
VR.2013.00001
Expropriation Compensation Appeal Regarding Road Project Valuation and Procedural Challenges

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 35 AbtrG

Forms the basis for the court's decision regarding the expropriation process and the assessment of damages.

§ 41 Abs. II AbtrG

Cited in relation to the binding nature of the superior court's decision upon remand.

§ 15 Abs. I AbtrG

Relevant for the court's determination on the extent of damages and the causal link to road construction work.

§ 15 Abs. II AbtrG

Used by the court in assessing the admissibility of damages and the principle of proportionality in expropriation cases.

Art. 93 BGG

The court refers to this article in the context of the proceedings, likely related to the admissibility or procedure of the appeal after a remand from the Federal Supreme Court.

§ 17 VRG

This provision is foundational for the administrative court's review and reassessment of the case.

§ 20 Abs. I lit. b VRG

Applied by the court in its procedural decisions regarding the handling of the case and potential retrials or remands.

§ 50 Abs. I VRG

This article is relevant for the court's decision on costs and compensation awarded to the parties involved in the proceedings.

Art. 685 ZGB

The court cites this article in relation to the civil law concept of "excessiveness" applied to damages.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Verwaltungsgericht des Kantons Zürich: VR.2020.00003

--- · --- · --- · --- · --- · [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=222491&W10_KEY=13317027&nTrefferzeile=1&Template=standard/results/printviewdocument.fiw)

--- · --- · --- · Geschäftsnummer: · VR.2020.00003 · Entscheidart und -datum: · Endentscheid vom 30.06.2022 · Spruchkörper: · 3. Abteilung/3. Kammer · Weiterzug: · Dieser Entscheid ist rechtskräftig. · Rechtsgebiet: · Enteignungsrecht · Betreff: · formelle Enteignung · Schäden nach Strassenarbeiten: Unzureichende Sachverhaltsfeststellung Nach Rückweisung durch das Bundesgericht wies das Verwaltungsgericht die Sache an die Schätzungskommission zurück zur ergänzenden Sachverhaltsabklärung zum Bestand von Schäden und deren Verursachung durch die Strassenbauarbeiten (E. 2).

Die Schätzungskommission durfte nicht von einer verbindlichen oberinstanzlichen Sachverhaltsfeststellung ausgehen, dass die Erschütterungen aus den Strassenbauarbeiten unter den Richtwerten lagen (E. 3.1). Die Schätzungskommission hätte insbesondere die Art und Schwere der eingetretenen Schäden abklären und auch eine Gesamtschau über das Schadensbild im Hinblick auf die Frage anstellen müssen, ob (übermässige) Erschütterungen aus Strassenbauarbeiten die Ursache dafür bilden (E. 3.2). In mehrfacher Hinsicht ist die diesbezügliche Sachverhaltsermittlung ungenügend, auch bezüglich Schadensempfindlichkeit und Vorbeschädigungen (E. 3.3-3.6).

Der Nutzen der Strassenbauarbeiten für die Anrainerin vermag für sich allein im Rahmen der Interessenabwägung nicht ohne Weiteres eine erhebliche Reduktion einer allfälligen Entschädigung oder gar einen Ausschluss der Entschädigungspflicht zu rechtfertigen (E. 4.3.1). Bei der Beurteilung von Schäden aus Strassenbauarbeiten in enteignungsrechtlichen Verfahren wird keine besondere Schwere des Schadens vorausgesetzt, sondern gilt der privatrechtliche Übermässigkeitsbegriff analog (E. 4.3.2). Abzuklären wäre, ob die Erschütterungen das Mass überschritten, das Bauten und Anlagen mit erhöhter Empfindlichkeit üblicherweise auszuhalten haben, und die verursachten Sachschäden über den Rahmen von Bagatellen hinausgehen (E. 4.4).

Parteientschädigung für das Schätzungs- und Rekursverfahren (E. 5). Rückweisung zur ergänzenden Sachverhaltsabklärung und Neubeurteilung. · --- · Stichworte: · ADÄQUATER KAUSALZUSAMMENHANG BINDUNG AN RÜCKWEISUNGSENTSCHEID ENTEIGNUNG ENTEIGNUNGSVERFAHREN ENTSCHÄDIGUNGSPFLICHT ERSCHÜTTERUNGEN IMMISSIONEN INTERESSENABWÄGUNG KAUSALITÄT NACHBARRECHT RICHTWERTE SACHVERHALTSERMITTLUNG SCHADEN SCHADENERSATZ SCHÄTZUNGSKOMMISSION STRASSENBAU ÜBERMÄSSIGKEIT ÜBERWIEGENDE WAHRSCHEINLICHKEIT · Rechtsnormen: · § 35 AbtrG § 41 Abs. II AbtrG § 46 Abs. I AbtrG § 15 Abs. I AbtrG § 15 Abs. II AbtrG Art. 93 BGG § 17 VRG § 20 Abs. I lit. b VRG § 50 Abs. I VRG Art. 685 ZGB · Publikationen:

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