Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
II 2024 42 • VG SZ II 2024 42 Generato dall'IA

Property Owners v. Municipality (Development Charges Limitation Period)

Numero d'incarto II 2024 42
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Svizzera · Canton Svitto (CH-SZ)
Data della decisione

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Property owners appealed a municipal decision imposing development charges, arguing the claim was time-barred because the underlying authorization had been granted years prior and the development charges were levied after the statutory limitation period had expired. The court determined that the limitation period for imposing such charges begins when the decision granting the construction permit becomes legally binding, and since the administrative act establishing the basis for the charge (the authorization) was finalized before the applicable statute of limitations expired, the claim for the advantage-based development charge was not time-barred and thus upheld the imposition.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Property Owners v. Municipality (Development Charges Limitation Period): The court determined that the limitation period for imposing such charges begins when the decision granting the construction permit becomes legally binding, and since the administrative act establishing the basis for the charge (the authorization) was finalized before the applicable statute of limitations expired, the claim for the advantage-based development charge was not time-barred and thus upheld the imposition.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
termini contributi di urbanizzazione base legale incentivazione immobiliare accesso al fondo servitù di limitazione di costruzione Kausalabgaben (Vorteilsabgaben; Verjährung) | Kausalabgaben
Generato dall'IA

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

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n II 2024 42 |\n |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Entscheid vom 28. August 2024 |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n Dr.iur. Vital Zehnder, Vizepräsident |\n \n|\n |\n Dr.oec. Andreas Risi, Richter Dr.iur. Frank Lampert, Richter |\n \n|\n |\n Dr.iur. Thomas Twerenbold, Gerichtsschreiber |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Parteien |\n A.A.________ und B.A.________, \n Beschwerdeführer, \n vertreten durch … |\n \n|\n |\n gegen |\n \n|\n |\n Tiefbauamt, Postfach 1251, 6431 Schwyz, \n Vorinstanz, |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Gegenstand |\n Kausalabgaben (Vorteilsabgaben; Verjährung) |\n \n\n

\n \n

Sachverhalt: