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

Claim withdrawn; case struck out after settlement

CASSO zn10-039209-amc2210-12011/2011Cantonal Court / Social Insurance ChamberJan 10, 2011Withdrawn

Open source

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

Z.________ brought a social-insurance action against K.________ seeking annulment of the cancellation of her insurance contract and continued coverage. At the conciliation hearing on 10 January 2011, the parties signed a settlement under which the cancellation was annulled, coverage was owed for the period from 1 January 2008 to 31 July 2010, and Z.________ would be affiliated with CSS Assurances from 1 August 2010. K.________ also acknowledged CHF 1,000 toward counsel fees. Because the claim was withdrawn, the court struck the case from the docket and ordered no court costs or party costs beyond the agreed amount.

Omnilex headnote

Art. 94 al. 1 let. c LPA-VD; withdrawal of the claim after settlement: where the claimant withdraws the action following a conciliation agreement, the court removes the case from the docket. In such a procedural termination, no judicial fees are levied and no party costs are awarded unless the decision expressly provides otherwise. The settlement may record substantive concessions, but the court need not rule on the merits once the dispute has been withdrawn (consid. 1).

Full text

404 TRIBUNAL CANTONAL AMC 22/10 - 1/2011 C O U R D E S A S S U R A N C E S S O C I A L E S

Décision du 10 janvier 2011

Présidence de M. J O M I N I , juge unique Greffière :Mme Matile

Cause pendante entre : Z., à Préverenges, demanderesse, représentée par Me Gilles- Antoine Hofstetter, avocat à Lausanne, et K., à Lausanne, défenderesse.

Art. 94 al. 1 let. c LPA-VD

  • 2 - E n f a i t et e n d r o i t : Vu la demande du 22 novembre 2010 par laquelle Z.________ conclut à ce que la résiliation du contrat d’assurance qu’elle a souscrit auprès de K.________ soit annulée, cette dernière étant tenue de prendre en charge toutes les prestations dues au fournisseur de soins pour le passé et pour l’avenir, vu l’audience de conciliation du 10 janvier 2011, vu la convention signée par les parties à l'audience, ainsi libellée selon le procès-verbal: « I. La résiliation du contrat d’assurance souscrit par Z.________ auprès de K.________ est annulée, cette dernière étant ainsi tenue de prendre en charge toutes les prestations contractuellement dues au fournisseur de soins également à compter du 1 er janvier 2008, ce jusqu’au 31 juillet 2010, la demanderesse étant à compter du 1 er août 2010 affiliée à la CSS Assurances. II.K.________ se reconnaît être débitrice d’une participation aux honoraires du conseil de Z.________ de 1'000 fr. (mille francs). III.La demande du 22 novembre 2010 est retirée. »; attendu qu'il y a lieu de rayer la cause du rôle par suite du retrait de la demande, selon la procédure de l’art. 94 al. 1 let. c LPA-VD (loi cantonale vaudoise sur la procédure administrative du 28 octobre 2008, RSV 173.36), qu’il n’y a pas lieu de percevoir de frais de justice ni d’allouer des dépens.

  • 3 - Par ces motifs, le juge unique p r o n o n c e : I. La cause est rayée du rôle. II. Il n’est pas perçu de frais judiciaires, ni alloué de dépens. Le juge unique : La greffière : Du La décision qui précède est notifiée à : -Me Gilles-Antoine Hofstetter, avocat (pour Mme Z.), -K., par l'envoi de photocopies. La greffière :

Keywords

social insuranceconciliationwithdrawalsettlementinsurance cancellationcourt costsparty costs

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Whether the cancellation of the insurance contract should be annulled and coverage continued for the relevant period

The parties settled that the cancellation would be annulled and the insurer would cover the contractually due services from 2008-01-01 to 2010-07-31, with affiliation to CSS Assurances from 2010-08-01.

The dispute was resolved by a settlement signed at the conciliation hearing, making a judicial determination on the merits unnecessary.

Whether the proceedings should be removed from the docket after withdrawal of the claim

Yes. The case was struck from the docket because the claim was withdrawn.

Under Art. 94 para. 1 let. c LPA-VD, withdrawal of the claim requires the case to be removed from the docket.

Whether court costs or party costs should be ordered

No costs were charged and no party costs were awarded.

The court found no basis to levy judicial fees or grant costs in these circumstances.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

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