Lo spazio di lavoro basato sull'IA per i professionisti del settore legale

  • Ricerca giuridica con accesso a oltre 1 milione di fonti
  • Automazione dei documenti
  • Gestione delle pratiche
  • Ospitato nell'UE e in Svizzera

Prova gratis per 14 giorni (10 domande/giorno durante la prova)

Prova gratisVedi una demo

Reconsideration requests inadmissible under the new Lucerne CCP

JK 97 207/162Altro tribunale29 giu 1997Other

Apri la fonte

Estratto da Omnilex

Sintesi Omnilex

The text states that the new Lucerne CCP does not provide the reconsideration remedy known from administrative procedure law. Because the CCP exhaustively regulates proceedings and remedies, there is no room to import that remedy by analogy, including in summary UR proceedings; such requests are therefore generally inadmissible. At the same time, a summary UR decision is said not to have material res judicata effect, so a new application may be lodged and decided again if circumstances have changed, potentially leading to a modified decision.

Massima Omnilex

§ 116 VRG; §§ 125-138, 185-244, 230ff. ZPO; reconsideration remedy under the new Lucerne CCP: no gap-filling importation of administrative procedural remedies where the code exhaustively regulates proceedings and legal remedies. The judge may not create a remedy omitted by the legislature; this applies equally to summary UR proceedings, so reconsideration requests are in principle inadmissible (consid. with reference to LGVE 1996 I Nr. 21 and later decisions). However, a summary UR decision lacks material res judicata effect: upon changed circumstances, a fresh application may be filed at any time and a new decision rendered that departs from the earlier one.

Testo completo

In der neuen ZPO ist der dem Verwaltungsrechtspflegeverfahren bekannte Rechtsbehelf der Wiedererwägung (§ 116 VRG) nicht vorgesehen. Die neue Luzerner ZPO nennt eine abschliessende Zahl von Verfahren (§§ 185-244 sowie §§ 125-138 ZPO) und Rechtsmitteln. Angesichts der Regelungsdichte der neuen Verfahrensordnung bleibt kein Raum mehr für die lückenfüllende Anwendung von verwaltungsrechtlichen Verfahrensvorschriften. Es ist nicht Sache des Richters, einen Rechtsbehelf einzuführen, den der Gesetzgeber nicht vorsah. Dies gilt auch für das (summarische) UR-Verfahren (§ 133 Abs. 3 ZPO i.V.m. §§ 230ff. ZPO; vgl. LGVE 1996 I Nr. 21), weshalb auf entsprechende Gesuche prinzipiell nicht einzutreten ist (ebenso Entscheide JK 96 381/12 vom 22.1.1997 und JK 97 123/120 vom 4.6.1997).

LGVE 1987 I Nr. 37 ist damit obsolet. Gemäss Max. XII Nr. 317 wird ein (summarischer) UR-Entscheid indes nicht materiell rechtskräftig, so dass aufgrund veränderter Verhältnisse jederzeit ein neues Gesuch gestellt und ein neuer Entscheid gefällt werden kann, durch welchen der ursprüngliche Entscheid abgeändert wird.

Parole chiave

reconsiderationinadmissibilitysummary proceedingsmaterial res judicataprocedural remedieschanged circumstances

Estratto da Omnilex

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Omnilex

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether a reconsideration remedy exists under the new Lucerne CCP for summary UR proceedings.

Decisione estratta

No. The new procedural code provides an exhaustive list of proceedings and remedies, leaving no room to import the reconsideration remedy from administrative procedure law.

Motivazione estratta

Because the new CCP is highly detailed and exhaustively regulates proceedings and remedies, gap-filling by borrowing administrative procedural rules is impermissible; the court may not create a remedy the legislature did not provide.

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether a summary UR decision has material res judicata effect preventing a later request after changed circumstances.

Decisione estratta

No. A summary UR decision does not acquire material res judicata effect; a new request may be filed at any time if circumstances have changed, and a new decision may alter the original one.

Motivazione estratta

The text distinguishes inadmissibility of reconsideration as a procedural remedy from the absence of substantive finality of the UR decision itself, which allows renewed adjudication on changed facts.

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.