Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
741.01 SVGLCRLCSTR CH

Art. 30 Legge federale del 19 dicembre 1958 sulla circolazione stradale (LCStr)

LCStr; Titolo terzo: Norme della circolazione; Norma fondamentale; Capo secondo: Norme per i veicoli; I. Norme generali; Passeggeri, carico, rimorchi
Apri la fonte ufficiale Atto completo (168 Articoli) Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Art. 30 LCStr

Sui veicoli a motore e velocipedi il conducente può trasportare passeggeri soltanto sugli appositi posti. Il Consiglio federale può prevedere eccezioni; esso emana prescrizioni sul trasporto di persone mediante rimorchi.

I veicoli non devono essere sovraccaricati. Il carico deve essere collocato in modo che non sia di pericolo ne di ostacolo ad alcuno e che non possa cadere. I carichi sporgenti devono essere segnalati, di giorno e di notte, in modo ben visibile.

I veicoli a motore possono essere usati per il traino di rimorchi o di altri veicoli solo se la forza di trazione e i freni sono sufficienti e se il dispositivo di agganciamento è sicuro.

Il Consiglio federale emana prescrizioni sul trasporto degli animali e di materie e oggetti nocivi o ripugnanti.

Il Consiglio federale emana prescrizioni sul trasporto di merci pericolose. Stabilisce i tratti sui quali, per motivi dipendenti da condizioni locali o per necessità di regolazione del traffico, i veicoli che trasportano merci pericolose non possono circolare o possono circolare soltanto in maniera limitata. A proposito dei mezzi di contenimento per merci pericolose disciplina: a. la procedura di verifica della conformità ai requisiti essenziali; b. la procedura di riconoscimento dei servizi indipendenti incaricati di effettuare le valutazioni di conformità.

← Art. 29 LCStr Legge federale del 19 dicembre 1958 sulla circolazione stradale (LCStr) Art. 31 LCStr →

Ti chiedi come si applica questa disposizione alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa norma insieme alla giurisprudenza, ai commentari e alle disposizioni correlate in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (98)

ZZ.1977.15 · so (Art. 30 Abs. 2 SVG)
Trucker Fined for Unsecured Load After Abrupt Braking
This provision formed the basis of the original conviction, which the Higher Court upheld as correctly applied.
SR1 2025 5 · gr (Art. 30 Abs. 2 SVG in Verbindung mit Art. 96 Abs. 1 lit. c SVG)
Appeal of Conviction and Costs for Traffic and Toll Violations
The court confirms the acquittal (no contestation) of this charge in the final orders regarding the confirmation of the lower court's judgment.
IV.2024.42 · sg (Art. 30 Abs. 2 SVG)
Truck Driver Load Securing Violation and Worn Tires License Withdrawal
This article regarding securing the load was cited in the reasoning section (though not the ultimate basis for the dispositive ruling on the appeal itself, it is explicitly cited in the introductory summary/headnote alongside Art. 16b Abs. 1 lit. a SVG, and the factual basis relates to its breach). However, strictly following the rule to include ONLY provisions cited in the final orders (1. and 2.), only the procedural/cost articles in orders 1 and 2 are listed. Since the final orders (1. and 2.) do not explicitly cite Art. 30 Abs. 2 SVG, it is excluded based on the strict instruction regarding the dispositive.
810.2024.84 · bl (Art. 30 Abs. 2 Satz 2 SVG)
Gross Negligence in Load Securing Leads to License Suspension
This provision establishes the general duty for cargo to be secured in a way that it does not endanger or obstruct anyone and cannot fall off, forming the basis for the insufficient cargo securing.
460.23.5 · bl (Art. 30 Abs. 1 SVG)
Conviction for Mismanagement Affirmed, Sentence Modified, Employment Ban Overturned
This provision was applied in the context of a traffic violation.
2023.06.13.sr.2 · bl (Art. 30 Abs. 2 SVG)
Negligent Homicide in Food Truck Accident
This article is cited in conjunction with Art. 96 Abs. 1 lit. c SVG regarding exceeding permissible limits.
P/9180/2022 · ge (art. 30 al. 2 LCR cum 90 al. 1 LCR)
Prosecutor v. Defendant (Cargo Securing and Weight Violation)
Basis for declaring the defendant guilty of simple violation of traffic regulations regarding cargo securing.
STBER.2022.53 · so (Art. 30 Abs. 2 SVG)
State v. Defendant (Unsafe Vehicle Operation/Load Securing)
Cited in the final orders, confirming the legal basis for the offense.
P1 22 15 · vs (Art. 96 Abs. 1 lit. c SVG i.V.m. Art. 30 Abs. 2 SVG)
State v. Truck Weight Violation Appeal
This provision establishes the traffic violation (exceeding the total permissible weight) for which the appellant was found guilty in the final order.
SK1 2019 16 · gr (art. 30 cpv. 1 LCStr)
Cantonal Court Confirms Acquittal for Exceeding Towing Vehicle Capacity Based on Occupant Location
The court confirmed the acquittal of the appellant from the charge of violating traffic regulations under this article.
GG210047 · zh (Art. 90 Abs. 1 SVG in Verbindung mit Art. 57 Abs. 5 lit. a SVG sowie Art. 30 Abs. 1 SVG und Art. 3a Abs. 1 und 4 VRV sowie Art. 60 Abs. 2 VRV)
Qualified Facilitation of Illegal Entry and Related Traffic Violations
The defendant was found guilty of multiple simple traffic violations (related to unsecured/excess passengers).
SB200388 · zh (Art. 30 Abs. 1 SVG)
Stunt-Related Traffic Violation Appeal and Sentencing
Cited in the conviction order for violation regarding the transportation of persons in unauthorized places.
SB200389 · zh (Art. 30 Abs. 1 SVG)
Traffic Violation Stunt Conviction and Sentence Modification
This provision was cited in the final order regarding the guilty verdict concerning carrying passengers in unauthorized places.
CPEN.2021.16 · ne (Art. 30 al. 2 LCR)
Driver Acquitted of Straw Load Violations Due to Insufficient Evidence of Hazard
This provision, concerning vehicle overloading and load securing, formed the basis for one of the convictions that the appeal ultimately overturned.
STK 2019 76 · sz (Art. 90 Abs. 1 SVG i.V.m. Art. 30 Abs. 2 SVG und Art. 57 VRV)
Appeal of Theft, Trespassing, and Traffic Convictions with Partially Overturned Deportation Order
The defendant was found guilty of negligently violating traffic regulations by securing the load insufficiently under these provisions.