955.01 GWVOBAORD

CH

Art. 3 Ordinanza dell' 11 novembre 2015 relativa alla lotta contro il riciclaggio di denaro e il finanziamento del terrorismo (ORD) - Operazioni di credito

ORD; Capitolo 2: Intermediari finanziari

Apri la fonte ufficiale Atto completo (31 Articoli) Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Art. 3 ORD · Operazioni di credito

Non sono considerate operazioni di credito ai sensi dell’articolo 2 capoverso 3 lettera a LRD in particolare: a. l’assunzione di crediti; b. la concessione di crediti senza interessi ed emolumenti; c. la concessione di crediti tra società e socio, se il socio detiene una partecipazione di almeno il 10 per cento del capitale o dei voti nella società; d. la concessione di crediti tra datore di lavoro e lavoratore, se il datore di lavoro è tenuto al pagamento dei contributi alle assicurazioni sociali per i lavoratori coinvolti nella relazione di credito; e. le relazioni di credito tra persone prossime (art. 7 cpv. 5); f. la concessione di crediti effettuata a titolo accessorio rispetto a un altro negozio giuridico; g. il leasing operativo; h. gli impegni eventuali a favore di terzi; i. i finanziamenti di transazioni commerciali, se il loro rimborso non è effettuato dalla controparte.

← Art. 2 ORD Ordinanza dell' 11 novembre 2015 relativa alla lotta contro il riciclaggio di denaro e il finanziamento del terrorismo (ORD) - Oggetto Art. 4 ORD →

Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (6)

A/3012/2020 · ge (Art. 3 Ord. 4)

Appeal Regarding Untimely Opposition to Supplementary Benefit Recalculation

The court ruled the procedure free of charge in order 3 of the dispositive.

A/737/2020 · ge (Art. 3. Ord. 3.)

Employer Obligation to Reimburse Work Initiation Allowances Following Termination Without Just Cause

The disposal orders explicitly state that the procedure is free of charge ('Dit que la procédure est gratuite'). While the specific article number for procedural costs in the dispositive is missing, the order itself refers to the status of the costs.

A/3736/2016 · ge (Art. 3 Comb. Ord. AI)

Deaf Individual's Appeal for Specific SIP Videophone Denied in Favor of Economical App Alternative

Cited in the reasoning as the basis for the right to auxiliary means, but not explicitly in the dispositive orders.

15.2013.97 · ti (Art. 3 ORD. 3)

Enforcement Decision on Salary Garnishment and Share Seizure Upheld

This order explicitly states that no costs (spese) are to be collected and no allowances (indennità) are to be awarded.

A/1804/2004 · ge (Art. 3 ORD. FIN. T.)

Pension Fund v. Insured Person (Disability Benefits and Reactive Depression)

This provision is not explicitly mentioned in the dispositive orders 1-4. However, the dispositive states: '3. Dit que la procédure est gratuite.' The article governing costs is typically Art. 66 al. 1 LTF or equivalent. Since the text only mentions 'Art. 3 ORD. FIN. T.' in the context of the ruling '3. Dit que la procédure est gratuite,' and given the strict instruction to only include explicitly cited provisions in the dispositive, and Art. 3 ORD. FIN. T. is not present, this point must be derived from the actual order text. Order 3 states: '3. Dit que la procédure est gratuite.' If there were an article cited for this, it would be included. Since no specific cost article (like Art. 66 LTF, which is not present) is cited for Order 3, I must strictly adhere to the visible citations in Orders 1-4. Order 3 only states the outcome without citing the legal basis for free proceedings.

INC.2002.47702 · ti (Art. 3 Art. 3 ord. 3.)

Provisional Release Granted Due to Insufficient Substantiation of Continued Pre-Trial Detention Necessity

This appears to be a typo/misinterpretation in the extraction tool regarding costs; based on context, Article 3 refers to the cost order, but the explicit legal citation for costs is missing from the P.Q.M. but the order states 'Non si percepiscono spese giudiziarie e non si assegnano ripetibili' (No judicial costs are perceived and no reimbursement is awarded). The closest applicable citation that might be intended in similar decisions regarding costs is often Art. 66 LTF (if this were federal court), but here no specific procedural article for costs is clearly provided in the P.Q.M. list other than the general cost statement in Order 3. Given the rules, only explicitly cited provisions in the P.Q.M. should be included. Since no standard cost provision (like Art. 66 LTF or its cantonal equivalent) is explicitly listed in the P.Q.M. citation block next to the numbered orders, I will omit this ambiguous reference unless a clear provision is found.