Inventory listing vs. formal monument protection

ATA/796/1998Cour de justice / Verwaltungskammer08.12.1998Dismissed

Von Omnilex extrahiert

Omnilex-Zusammenfassung

The court considered a challenge to a monument-protection decision. It held that the appellant had not demonstrated that mere inventory listing was inadequate. Given the subsidiary character of classification, the court found the more stringent measure unnecessary and disproportionate, and dismissed the appeal.

Omnilex-Regeste

LPMNS 11 al. 2; protection of monuments; distinction between inventory listing and classification: classification constitutes a more intrusive protection measure and is justified only where inventory listing does not sufficiently safeguard the protected interest. The burden lies on the complainant to show the inadequacy of the less severe measure. Absent such proof, and where the additional protection would be unnecessary or disproportionate, classification must be refused (consid. unspecified).

Gesamter Gesetzestext

Descripteurs

PROCEDURE DE CLASSEMENT; PROTECTION DES MONUMENTS; MONUMENT; INVENTAIRE; CE

Normes

LPMNS.11 al.2

Résumé

Différence entre une mise à l'inventaire et un classement. La recourante n'a pas démontré que la mise à l'inventaire était insuffisante. Le classement apparait en outre comme une mesure inutile et disproportionnée. .

Schlagwörter

monument protectioninventory listingclassificationproportionalitysubsidiaritycultural heritage

Von Omnilex extrahiert

Von Omnilex extrahierte Kernrechtsfragen

Kernrechtsfrage

Whether formal classification of the monument was justified despite existing inventory listing.

Extrahierter Entscheid

The appellant did not show that inventory listing was insufficient; formal classification was unnecessary and disproportionate.

Extrahierte Begründung

The court distinguished inventory listing from classification and held that the more intrusive measure was not warranted on the record.

Inventory listing vs. formal monument protectionKI-generiert