Art. 66 Legge federale del 30 marzo 1911 di complemento del Codice civile svizzero (CO)

HG.2005.32.HG.2006.66 · sg (Art. 66 OR)

Shareholder Consortium Standing and Void Resolution Regarding Unqualified Auditor

Cited implicitly through the mention of Art. 66 ZPO concerning subsidiary claims, but the main ground relates to the nullity of the resolution, which points to substantive law first.

RBOG.1995.Nr.7 · tg (Art. 66 OR)

Claim for Payment for Spare Parts Barred Due to Unlawful Origin

The court affirmed the lower court's decision to dismiss the claim based on this article, which concerns the non-claimability of payments made with the intent to bring about an unlawful or immoral result.

C/8498/2020 · ge (Art. 66 CO)

Indemnity Repayment Obligation Despite Alleged Illicit Transfer and Donation Claim

This article concerning the non-repetition of sums given for an illicit purpose was discussed in relation to the appellant's argument on contract nullity.

VB.2022.00083 · zh (Art. 66 Abs. 1 CO)

Mootness of Appeal Due to COVID-19 Hardship Program Contribution

The court ordered the lower instance to bear the costs of the proceedings.

ZVE.2021.42 · ag (Art. 66 OR)

Simulated Loan Agreement for CHF 20,000 Declared Invalid

Precludes repayment of amounts given with the intention of achieving an unlawful or immoral outcome, such as hush money in criminal proceedings.

VSBES.2021.168 · so (Art. 63-66 OR)

Social Security Family Benefit Overpayment Recoupment Due to Undisclosed Cohabitation

Cited in reasoning regarding the subsidiary application for undue enrichment in the context of § 164 Abs. 2bis SG for the period starting January 1, 2020, although not strictly necessary for the final order.

P1 21 29 · vs (Art. 66 OR)

Appeal of Narcotics Conviction Based on Circumstantial Evidence

This article regarding interest rates is used to calculate the interest due on the compensation for unjustified detention.

VWBES.2020.109 · so (Art. 66 OR)

Residence Permit Non-Renewal Upheld Due to Criminality

Although implied by the order on costs, the explicit reference used in the dispositive is Art. 66 LTF, which is the correct procedural article in this context (LTF is the Federal Supreme Court Act, but here it's a Cantonal Court judgment imposing costs, usually following Cantonal procedural rules or explicitly mentioning the applicable article). Since the text explicitly mentions 'Kosten des Verfahrens vor Verwaltungsgericht', and the court imposing costs in its dispositive is the Administrative Court, the cost rule is applied. However, since the final dispositive only lists a monetary value and mentions 'Kosten des Verfahrens', the actual legal basis for costs *used in the final order* is usually the relevant procedural code for that court. In the absence of an explicit citation like 'Art. X Kostenentscheid', and since the preceding discussion does not cite a cost article for the *decision* itself, we only rely on what is explicitly stated in the final orders. Order 3 explicitly imposes costs, but does not cite the legal basis for the cost award.

IV.2018.11 · sg (Art. 66 OR)

Disability Pension Entitlement Following Conflicting Medical Assessments

The decision orders the losing party to pay the court costs, implicitly based on general procedural rules for costs, which often reference the Code of Obligations (OR) in cantonal proceedings for court fees.

21.2017.EKA · vd (Art. 66 CO)

Assignee's Derivative Suit Against Former Officers Dismissed for Lack of Standing and Insufficient Proof of Damages

Cited in the reasoning regarding the liability of managing partners, not in the dispositive.

ZKBER.2016.80 · so (Art. 66 Abs. 1 OR)

Spousal Maintenance Modification Based on Changed Financial Circumstances

This article is implicitly cited as the basis for ordering the costs of the appeal procedure.

TDSIO C1 14 244 · vs (art. 66 al. 1 CO)

Timeshare Owner Sued for Unpaid Quarterly Charges

Cited in the reasoning regarding the requirement for associations to have statutory purposes.

C/22544/2011 · ge (art. 66 CO)

Taxi Driver Lease-Farming Contract Simulation and Regulatory Circumvention

Cited in the reasoning regarding the non-restitution of payments made to achieve an illicit purpose.

C/17378/2010 · ge (art. 66 CO)

Subtenant Rent Fixation and Reimbursement Dispute

Cited by the first instance court in reasoning K to reject the claim for restitution of 350 fr. payments, though this reasoning was ultimately deemed irrelevant by the appellate court.

C/17378/2010 · ge (art. 66 CO)

Subtenant Rent Fixation and Reimbursement Dispute

Cited in reasoning 6.2 as a ground excluding the right to restitution if the payments were knowingly made for an illicit or immoral purpose (to deceive the principal lessors).