Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
ATAS/1071/2004 • CJ GE ATAS/1071/2004 Généré par l'IA

Statutory Endorsement Requirement for Third-Party Enforcement

Numéro de cause ATAS/1071/2004
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Admis (Allowed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The case concerns a dispute over a statutory right to enforce a claim against a third party, where the initial relationship between the primary parties was governed by an agreement that lacked a necessary statutory endorsement for enforcement against third parties. The court reasoned that the controlling statute explicitly requires the endorsement to be present on the relevant instrument to permit enforcement against successors or assigns, and since the instrument in question lacked this mandated endorsement, the third party could not be held liable under the statutory enforcement provision, thus upholding the lower court's determination.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Statutory Endorsement Requirement for Third-Party Enforcement: The court reasoned that the controlling statute explicitly requires the endorsement to be present on the relevant instrument to permit enforcement against successors or assigns, and since the instrument in question lacked this mandated endorsement, the third party could not be held liable under the statutory enforcement provision, thus upholding the lower court's determination.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
prétention de tiers condition légale endossement exécution promesse de céder dispositions sur la promotion

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF
The court ordered the appellant to pay the procedural costs.
Généré par l'IA
A/1808/2003
Statutory Compliance Jurisdictional Predicates Case
A/1623/2003
Statutory Notice Requirement and Substantial Compliance
A/1812/2003
Statutory Notice and Liability Dispute
C/8776/2017
Third-Party Claim Admissibility and Forum Clause Validity
A/2717/2006
Contractual Liability Contingent on Third-Party Action

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

The court ordered the appellant to pay the procedural costs.

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'&+,,1

 /

 /  "/   " "

+2  34  $  +' 3  +,,1 



" "/ 5  " / (   !"#$%&'





 $ .6666666666 ()))*% )&+&'  6666666666 *7  *) (, -) ,(../ ,   '0   1)*) ())

2,-3 )**455555555556 7))8



           ! "    #$ %

   -:+;-  

//  ./

 . *))  9= >') :<<:  )  3')  (.) 2)-.&  )8  )7)* .  6')  0) 7())  *))*.)  ((3%/)?5555555555/55555555552)- .& *7 81)* 0)3 )**455555555556  7))@

 *7 7)..)).)'(999:7*'):<<:@

 )) )  A(:<<:)*.)  ((3 ( ()-'* ..))7(*. *7 ..))  0B#: )0-'))')'2)-.& 68 0B;< ))7())2)-.& ?8@

    ** ()  )C  * ' 77  9 D :<<; '  ( )7)) )3')03))> )))@

." :=C:<<$ )C *>*0).C))* )*. ) *7 .)) 6- - - @

" ' *7)))7,*)B

" /   /

0, (  0B :A  ?  '   C 1  (  )C) ?*("(1)()%))7(*(% 0B# 6@

  0B ;< B ;  ? 0(.E 1) ))(  . *3)3 3' 0C' .  .).)   ))  ((3 %  ) 0)7()) *.@

0B#: 60..)1.3)@

    )' , )) 6- - -   )C  *  >3*1 )')3) )'(10)7)* *))*.)  ((3 1)*).*)(*@

0)') & >3 ("(03) )C) ?B

77777

 +9:;$#+:<<<  -;+;-    " /.  /  "/   " "

$

839   :   ;     <% '(+ =>

  9 

9B *'C0).C))* *.*. )A(:<<:% 0  /) ?5555555555  /5555555555  ()& 0) 7())B

$ 9

:B >B

;B  (  )  .)( 0 ) ()*  7'  *7   #<<7B

  377)F  .*) F     ) 6 C6 

.)7( .*")7)*,.).377



 +9:;$#+:<<<