Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
ATAS/1006/2004 • CJ GE ATAS/1006/2004 Généré par l'IA

Waiver Validity Upheld Due to Clear Language

Numéro de cause ATAS/1006/2004
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

A party challenged the validity of a waiver of statutory rights contained in an agreement, asserting that the language used was ambiguous and failed to clearly and conspicuously convey the specific rights being relinquished. The court held that the waiver provision was sufficiently clear and unambiguous, finding that the language adequately apprised the party of the rights being waived, thereby upholding the validity of the agreement's terms as written.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Waiver Validity Upheld Due to Clear Language: The court held that the waiver provision was sufficiently clear and unambiguous, finding that the language adequately apprised the party of the rights being waived, thereby upholding the validity of the agreement's terms as written.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
renonciation au droit validité du contrat précision des normes clause de légitimation clause d'effectivité déclaration d'exécution

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF
Imposed the costs of the federal proceedings on the appellant.
Généré par l'IA
A/3833/2006
Enforceability of Statutory Rights Waiver in Contract
A/2020/2004
Statutory Interpretation of Contractual Waiver and Breach
A/2641/2004
Statutory Validity Challenge Upheld Against Vagueness and Notice Claims
A/807/2004
Waiver Validity in Business Termination Dispute
A/488/2007
Contractual Waiver Enforceability Dispute

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

Imposed the costs of the federal proceedings on the appellant.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

                 !

"#"$$$%

& #'&$ %$ "$  &#$% "%'

(  )* +   ) +  



,'$ # -&# "%'  &' (  .&#$%  !"#$!"%&  '

( 

"//'% %$ "$  .&#$%  /0 '$0''  )*(+,#-.



1 /2222222222# 110 



       

   324  

$ /'

%5 6(788888888880 0. /)9) ).0(3"1 /:3""35     0 0 1  '; 1  &  <      9   =1-&  <>59 00)01(0) )%" ? 3""4  )/) ) 1  ( 1- ) 9@@  ( ) 9 .) 0 =1- 9 > )  A 9( ( )9 (  ( 1(@(  2()9/ 1(@(5

35 9   ()(0   ; )9(:. ( 1(@( ) ( /( )  )(/)/  @#)33/3""!33?3""!#): )90. 1 0)90 /1 )/ #) . 0)1 0 ) )(  ' ) / 5 90  0 0 /  :00@ )9)/ 0 ?(- 1(   10()5  9 ))   ;# 90  (  (   )911 ; )9/1(*0 ) (//   ) <B1 C .  ;.(=<>5

45  )0( ) %$ ? 3""!# 9   ()0 A 90  /  1(@(D 0)9/1(*0)(//#1(10())34?3""! 33(E 3"",#D))/ 0?(-)9  1(10()) 34?3""!33(E 3""!#1))/ 0?(-)-34(E 3""! 1)   )0 ) / 5  /(   ))  )/ 0  0 0 @C0 A @53331?(5

!5  % ?  3""!#  &  <  @(/0 (11( (#  /( @ D  )/ 0?(-)9  ( )1 )D /(1-)01B  ) )/)#)( D./ )( )0: )-%(./:3""45 9 ? 09(11( (1)0()%F? 3""!5

F5  )%4(E 3""!#&  < ? 0(1-) : ) 0#  (  A  D 90 (  /  :00@ )9)/ 0 ?(-)9  )-3$1 /:3""4 9 ()/0A. /(  (1() 5

G5 01()%F( (:3""!#9 ( ? )(5



$ #"'

%5 (@(/0/ A9 5FG)(9(; (?)=># :  ()( (/10  1(  )10 5

35  )H 5,%)(1(0))/  .)%31 /:%+$F = ># H ( 0 1 # )H(@@ (  DI # ()( H11   ) 



2%,3"23""!  424   )(     ( ?)D   1 : )HI  @@ 0 1 H ) 1(0)5   #  D-   )(    (:; ( ) 1     )0(  ). (11(:5

45 H1-#  (?)D)6(788888888881( I @@ 0 1H)10 1(0) :)01. A(( D10  ()9 #&  <#0.0 @()05

? @1(0D )H1190 )9. A1 1A 1(0)5



# % " '/  #'&$ %$ "$  &#$% "%'

 331 

%5 116(78888888888J

35 /1  )03")0/:3""!1()0 /#)(0  A )1( (;@@) :1((  (5

    ;@@K  0) K    &)  6                

(1(@(/)10 I  ( @0C1;@@



2%,3"23""!