Art. 11 Legge sulla giustizia amministrativa (LGA) - Principio d'istruttoria e obbligo di collaborazione

VR3 2018 81 · gr (Art. 11 Abs. 1 VRG)

Cellular Antenna Permit Denial Over Aesthetic Concerns Overturned on Balancing Test

This provision was cited in the reasoning section regarding the investigative principle, but it is not explicitly mentioned in the final orders (dispositive) 1-5.

VR2 2024 1078 · gr (Art. 11 Abs. 1 VRG)

Property Valuation Appeal: Discounted Leasehold Interest Calculation Upheld

Cited in the reasoning regarding the official investigation of the facts, although the substantive decision confirmed the valuation, the final orders are procedural/cost-related.

VR2 2024 1078 · gr (Art. 11 Abs. 2 VRG)

Property Valuation Appeal: Discounted Leasehold Interest Calculation Upheld

Cited in the reasoning regarding the obligation of parties to cooperate in establishing the facts, although the final orders are procedural/cost-related.

VR3 2024 67 · gr (Art. 11 VRG)

Municipality v. Appellant: Building Ban Violation and Penalty Justification

The appellant was instructed about his duty to cooperate in establishing the facts upon remand.

R 2024 6 · gr (art. 11 cpv. 1 LGA)

Property Owner v. Municipality Regarding Ancillary Structure Permit

Cited in the reasoning concerning the principle of official investigation, which is preparatory to the final decision.

R 2024 6 · gr (art. 11 cpv. 2 LGA)

Property Owner v. Municipality Regarding Ancillary Structure Permit

Cited in the reasoning concerning the obligation of the interested party to collaborate in the investigation.

U 2023 15 · gr (Art. 11 Abs. 2 VRG)

Appeal Against Denial of Victims' Compensation Based on Time-Barred Abuse Claim

Cited in the reasoning regarding the victim's duty to cooperate.

R 2022 37 · gr (Art. 11 VRG)

Neighbor's Appeal Against Retaining Wall Permits Dismissed

Cited in the reasoning to invoke the principle of official investigation, which supported the conclusion reached before the dispositive orders.

A 2023 19 · gr (Art. 11 Abs. 1 VRG)

Property Gains Tax Refund Appeal Dismissed Due to Pretextual Primary Residence Claim

Cited in the reasoning (Erwägung 4) confirming the court's duty to establish the facts ex officio, which is a procedural point relevant to the court's conduct but not explicitly in the final dispositive orders 1-4. However, based on strict instruction, I must review if any procedural articles not in the final orders but relating to the outcome are implicitly covered. Since the instruction is 'explicitly cited in the dispositive (the numbered orders at the end of the decision)', I must only select from orders 1-4.

U 2023 31 · gr (Art. 11 VRG)

Appeal Regarding Social Assistance Requirements and Imputed Household Income

Cited twice in the reasoning leading to the partial annulment for violating the duty of the administrative authority to clarify the facts regarding the household compensation.

U 2023 31 · gr (Art. 11 VRG)

Refugee Social Assistance Appeal: Job Search Requirements Upheld, Imputed Income Deduction Overturned for Lack of Investigation

Cited as the basis for the administrative authority's duty of inquiry, which was found to be violated regarding the household compensation.

U 2022 69 · gr (Art. 11 Abs. 1 VRG)

Appeal Against Revocation of EU/EFTA Residency Permit Granted Based on Subsequent Employment Status

Cited in the reasoning regarding the administrative authorities' duty to establish the facts ex officio (Investigation Principle).

R 2021 118 · gr (Art. 11 Abs. 1 VRG)

Appeal Against Cantonal Road Construction Dismissed Over Property Access Impact

Cited when discussing the principle of official investigation regarding the factual determination.

R 2021 118 · gr (Art. 11 Abs. 2 VRG)

Appeal Against Cantonal Road Construction Dismissed Over Property Access Impact

Cited when discussing the duty of those involved to cooperate in establishing the facts.

R 2021 118 · gr (Art. 11 Abs. 3 VRG)

Appeal Against Cantonal Road Construction Dismissed Over Property Access Impact

Cited regarding the court's discretion in collecting evidence, which justified not ordering a traffic expert opinion.