The AI workspace for legal professionals

  • Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
  • Document automation
  • Matter management
  • Hosted in the EU and Switzerland

Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)

Try for freeBook a demo

Association lacks standing to challenge zoning derogation

ATA/561/1997Court of Justice / Administrative ChamberSep 23, 1997Dismissed

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

Action patrimoine vivant (APV) appealed against a derogatory authorization permitting closed premises not open to the public. The court held that APV had no standing under LEXT 15 because the statute does not confer appeal rights on cantonal-interest associations, and APV also failed the ordinary association-standing test since most of its members were not directly affected. In any event, the change of use complied with the applicable planning rules, including Art. 9 PUS. The appeal was dismissed.

Omnilex headnote

LEXT.15; standing of associations to appeal planning derogations and requirements for association standing in general; a cantonal-interest association cannot derive appeal rights from the statute unless expressly provided, and ordinary association standing requires that a majority of members be directly and sufficiently affected by the contested measure. Absent such standing, the appeal is inadmissible; moreover, the court may note that the contested change of use is substantively compatible with the applicable zoning derogation rules (Art. 9 PUS).

Full text

Descripteurs

PLAN DE ZONES; AUTORISATION DEROGATOIRE(EN GENERAL); CHANGEMENT D'AFFECTATION; QUALITE POUR AGIR; QUALITE POUR RECOURIR; ASSOCIATION; VG

Normes

LEXT.15

Résumé

Action patrimoine vivant (APV) n'a pas la qualité pour recourir contre une autorisation de créer des locaux fermés au public en application de l'art. 9 PUS car la LEXT ne donne pas la qualité pour recourir aux associations d'importance cantonale et l'APV ne possède pas la qulité pour recourir des associations car la majorité de ses membres n'est pas touché par cette autorisation. Le changement d'affectation est de toute façon conforme aux dispositions légales (notamment à l'art. 9 PUS).

Keywords

planning lawzoning derogationchange of usestanding to appealassociation standingassociationadmissibility

Extracted by Omnilex

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Key legal question

Whether Action patrimoine vivant (APV) has standing to appeal the derogatory authorization under Art. 9 PUS and LEXT 15.

Extracted holding

APV lacks standing because LEXT does not grant appeal rights to cantonal-interest associations, and APV also does not satisfy association standing requirements since most of its members are not directly affected by the authorization.

Extracted reasoning

The court relied on the applicable standing rules: statutory association standing was unavailable under LEXT, and ordinary association standing failed because the majority of members lacked a sufficient personal and direct impact.

Key legal question

Whether the change of use and the authorization were lawful under the planning rules, in particular Art. 9 PUS.

Extracted holding

The change of use is compliant with the applicable legal provisions, including Art. 9 PUS.

Extracted reasoning

Even aside from standing, the court found the planning measure to be legally admissible and consistent with the zoning derogation rules.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.