Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
173.8 GTARLTAR CH-VS

Art. 29 Legge sul tariffario delle spese e ripetibili dinanzi alle autorità giudiziarie o amministrative (LTar) - Onorario del consulente legale - Casi speciali

Indennità - Disposizioni Generali
Apri la fonte ufficiale Atto completo (47 Articoli) Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Art. 29 GTar · Casi speciali

1. In casi che richiedevano un lavoro straordinario, in particolare quando doveva essere eseguito parzialmente al di fuori dell'orario di lavoro ordinario, quando i mezzi di prova erano numerosi e difficili da raccogliere o coordinare, il dossier del procedimento probatorio assumeva un volume del tutto particolare, le questioni di fatto e di diritto erano delicate, il legale doveva rappresentare diverse parti o il suo cliente era opposto a diverse parti, l'autorità può concedere un onorario più elevato rispetto a quanto previsto dalla tariffa.

2. Quando esiste una sproporzione evidente tra il valore della controversia e l'interesse delle parti al processo o tra il compenso secondo la presente tariffa e il lavoro effettivo del legale, l'autorità può ridurre l'onorario al di sotto del minimo menzionato.

3. In caso di rinuncia al processo, ritiro del ricorso, sentenza contumaciale, transazione, irricevibilità e, in generale, quando il caso non si conclude con una sentenza di merito, i compensi possono essere ridotti in maniera corrispondente.

← Art. 28 GTar - Valore della lite Legge sul tariffario delle spese e ripetibili dinanzi alle autorità giudiziarie o amministrative (LTar) - Ambito di applicazione Art. 30 GTar - Assistenza Legale Gratuita →

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 (97)

TCVS C1 16 238 · vs (Art. 29 al. 2 LTar)
Insurer Reimbursement Claim in Plane Crash Case Rejected Despite Overcoming Prescription Period
Used to determine the amount of costs awarded to the successful party for the appeal procedure.
C1 25 101 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 LTar)
Cantonal Court Decision on Costs and Legal Fees After Federal Tribunal Ruling
Cited in determining the amount of legal fees for the first instance and appeal proceedings.
C1 25 104 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 1 und 2 GTar)
Father v. Child Protection Authority on Visitation and Procedural Delays
Cited regarding the possibility of increasing or decreasing the standard rates based on the lawyer's effort.
C1 25 53 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 LTar)
Remand of Cantonal Decision on Liquidator Removal Appeal Costs Apportionment
Cited in the reasoning regarding the reduction of legal fees for the subsequent procedure, which is reflected in the final amount awarded.
A1 24 19 · vs (art. 4, 29 al. 2 et 39 LTar)
Historic Property Demolition and Construction Authorization Challenge
Cited as the basis for calculating and imposing costs (attorney fees) on the appellants.
C1 24 38 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 GTar)
Withdrawal of Foreign Custody Enforcement and Denial of Legal Aid
Cited as a basis for reducing the fee when the case does not end with a merits decision (e.g., withdrawal).
C1 22 226 · vs (art. 27, 29 al. 2, 32 al. 1 et 35 al. 1 let. a LTar)
Traffic Accident Claim Timeliness Despite Prescription Claim
Cited in the reasoning for determining the amount of the attorney fees awarded to the appellee based on the tariff law.
C1 23 121 · vs (art. 29 al. 1 LTar)
Loan Repayment vs. Breach of Confidentiality Counterclaim
Cited as the basis for partially admitting the joint appeal and increasing the professional fees (dépens) awarded to the respondent for the first instance proceedings.
F1 24 138 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 et 39 LTar)
Taxpayer v. Cantonal Corporate Tax Commission (Timeliness of Corporate Tax Objection)
Cited in the reasoning (5.2) as part of the justification for setting the indemnity amount.
P1 24 69 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 GTar)
Cantonal Court Dismisses Defamation Appeal Due to Improper Submission
Applied to justify the proportional reduction of the court fee because the procedure ended at an early stage.
F1 24 105 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 et 39 LTar)
Cantonal Court Grants Lump-Sum Deduction for Privately Rented Box-Garages Following Federal Tribunal Annulment
Cited in the dispositive as part of the basis (LTar) for awarding costs to the appellant.
C1 22 61 · vs (Art. 29 al. 2 LTar)
Employee Termination, Non-Compete Breach, and Penalty Reduction
Cited in the final order as a criterion for setting the appeal expenses.
P1 23 107 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 1 GTar)
Appeal Regarding Conviction, Sentence, and Damages in Attempted Rape and Drug Case
Used in the reasoning to assess whether the case warranted an exceptional fee for the defense counsel (Patrick Ruppen) in the first instance.
A1 23 67 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 LTar)
Notary Sanctioned for Breach of Professional Secrecy in Divorce Proceedings
Cited in the final order (8.3) when assessing the amount of legal costs awarded.
C1 23 55 · vs (art. 29 al. 2, 32 al. 1 et 35 al. 1 let. a LTar)
Appellant v. Company Regarding Unjustified Dismissal and Procedural Deficiencies
Cited in the reasoning to determine the amount of the appeal costs awarded.