progetti

Limited judicial review in planning and building cases

V 90 99Altro tribunale22 apr 1991Not Examined

Apri la fonte

Estratto da Omnilex

Sintesi Omnilex

The excerpt states the governing rule for planning and building disputes: unless a special provision provides otherwise, the Administrative Court may review only within the limited scope of §§ 152 ff. VRG. Under § 154 Abs. 2 VRG, parties may not introduce new facts on judicial review unless the challenged decision itself opens that issue; correspondingly, new legal objections based on later factual allegations are inadmissible. This restriction is justified by procedural economy and was upheld by the Federal Court as not overly formalistic.

Massima Omnilex

§§ 152 ff. VRG, § 154 Abs. 2 VRG; scope of review in planning and building matters and inadmissibility of new facts and new objections on judicial review. Absent a contrary special provision, judicial review in building and planning cases remains limited to the legality of the contested decision on the basis of the factual allegations already advanced in the administrative proceedings. New factual allegations are excluded at the judicial stage unless the contested decision itself gives occasion to them. Consequently, new legal objections predicated on newly introduced facts are likewise barred. These rules serve procedural economy and the streamlined enforcement of substantive law and are not to be qualified as overly formalistic (consid. not specified).

Testo completo

Mangels einer gegenteiligen Sondervorschrift (das neue Planungs- und Baugesetz unterscheidet sich diesbezüglich nicht vom früheren Baugesetz; vgl. § 206 PBG mit den §§ 134 und 144 BauG) kommt dem Verwaltungsgericht in Bau- und Planungssachen nur beschränkte Überprüfungsbefugnis im Sinne des § 152 ff. VRG zu. So können die Parteien vor Verwaltungsgericht keine neuen Tatsachen mehr vorbringen, soweit nicht der angefochtene Entscheid dazu Anlass gibt (§ 154 Abs. 2 VRG). Das Verwaltungsgericht kann daher bloss prüfen, ob der angefochtene Entscheid aufgrund der im vorinstanzlichen Verfahren vorgebrachten tatsächlichen Behauptungen rechtlich haltbar ist, wie das Baudepartement zu Recht bemerkt. Das hat zur Folge, dass vor Gericht neue Rügen, das heisst die Geltendmachung neuer Rechtsverletzungen aufgrund neu vorgebrachter tatsächlicher Behauptungen, nicht mehr zulässig ist. Das Bundesgericht hat die konstante Praxis des Verwaltungsgerichts in dieser Frage im Urteil J. vom 3. November 1988 geschützt. Es hat dazu ausgeführt, Regeln wie § 154 VRG dienten der Straffung des Verfahrens und damit einer sowohl im Interesse des Beschwerdeführers wie auch des bauwilligen Eigentümers liegenden Steigerung der Prozessökonomie. Weder sie noch die Praxis dazu könnten als überspitzt formalistisch bezeichnet werden, da sie gerade einer effizienten Verwirklichung des materiellen Rechts dienten.

Parole chiave

planning lawbuilding lawlimited reviewnew factsprocedural economyformalism

Estratto da Omnilex

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Omnilex

Questione giuridica chiave

Extent of judicial review in planning and building cases under the VRG

Decisione estratta

Absent a contrary special rule, the Administrative Court has only limited review powers under §§ 152 ff. VRG.

Motivazione estratta

The new Planning and Building Act does not differ in this respect from the former Building Act; § 206 PBG corresponds to §§ 134 and 144 BauG. The review is therefore confined to whether the challenged decision is legally sustainable on the facts already alleged in the lower proceedings.

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether parties may raise new facts and new legal objections before the Administrative Court

Decisione estratta

Parties may not introduce new facts before the Administrative Court unless the challenged decision gives rise to them; new claims based on newly alleged facts are likewise inadmissible.

Motivazione estratta

§ 154 Abs. 2 VRG excludes new factual allegations at the judicial stage, which also prevents new objections based on such facts. The rule serves procedural streamlining and process economy and is not considered overly formalistic.

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

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