Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
ATAS/18/2005 • CJ GE ATAS/18/2005 Généré par l'IA

Valuation Standard Mandate Dispute

Numéro de cause ATAS/18/2005
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

The dispute concerned the proper calculation of the market value of certain assets, specifically involving the application of valuation standards and methodologies, with a central issue being whether a particular standard was mandatory or discretionary under the relevant regulations for the date in question. The court reasoned that based on the regulatory language and its previous interpretations, the specific valuation standard was indeed mandatory for the relevant period, thereby rejecting the methodology used by one party and affirming the valuation derived using the required standard, which significantly impacted the final monetary determination.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Valuation Standard Mandate Dispute: The court reasoned that based on the regulatory language and its previous interpretations, the specific valuation standard was indeed mandatory for the relevant period, thereby rejecting the methodology used by one party and affirming the valuation derived using the required standard, which significantly impacted the final monetary determination.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
valeur litigieuse estimation des actifs détermination du marché en cause normes de commercialisation obligation de chiffrer les conclusions valeur en douane

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF
This provision was cited in the dispositive for adjudicating costs (costs of the appeal).
Généré par l'IA
A/1261/2007
Contractual Valuation Method Interpretation Dispute
A/1600/2002
Regulatory Interpretation of Financial Obligation Calculation
A/2282/2003
Statutory Valuation Methodology Challenge Dismissed
A/612/2004
Tax Liability Valuation Method Dispute
A/1716/2007
Asset Valuation and Classification Dispute over Financial Instruments

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

This provision was cited in the dispositive for adjudicating costs (costs of the appeal).

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 #&&) 



  2222222222    ! "  #$ % $    &' (()'" (""$

 

33  -  -4+*5 -    ( " "' *+,-.%

            !

   30/13  

+  3 

  ('"" ( 0  4 0221$ &55       & ##  3   6"3.  7$  (""'    (&"%"(" ' %"-!( 88888888886"3. 7  "'&99 "9- '% " ":

(" " " $ "9($ -)&99 "9"  " ':

('""""( " "(;,%40221$& 9' ( " &99 "9 '%'9(:

((0+%40221$  - "  "( &99 "9%" ((':

&"%)"" <(.(9($  "  "9"".("99"":

((=('40221$ "4"%" '& -'( $ "9">'('"9"02('40221:

'" (;,('40221$&  ? ()@ $  %"-" "(&3"( "")&-&@ (;0%40221 (   "4 ( ' (  ( ( " "A        3-:

' 'A('-?A ) "$" ('('   '%':

 *  * 

"A%"&A" "?("""67' '("9"' " " '$ (.  ; B  022C$  "4   (  "$ ' ( D ?A$ (   '"(     %"3'"( $ D '    ;E ?A  6 F; F DE 7:

 "  - & " ( &' " ( ;E ?A $   "4 9'('0,?%"02216 5;C2;2E7$( "A%"( '$ ;C 9'%"$("" " " "A    "4 (  " ( "'A   - " ?A " "$ $ ( &  (&' "(%>?A:



/010,/21  3C/13    9'  - G F DE  F ;  F  <F0 $  "4   ( "H (   " "%-&3"%"(" '(0D  4;+E=:

' ?A((&. ""' 4":

  " 9'('    " A'' ( ("  (  " ( E  4 02226 7   '  %"A ; ?%" 022C$  H   ("9" " ( 4 ("" " 'A (  (" (  "F #    '"$  "  ( %" ) ("  G") ("  @  <' -  ". ( ""  )  .A "4     %"A I9" ?"(") (' "  (" 6 5 ;0,1E,"(F;$;0E;CE"(F14 '9'7F %<$ )"'($ -('9 (.A " " "$% ("  G")  '% (.  ? (  '  %"A6 5 ;;,  +C "(FE4$;;0CE2"(F1: ! ;++=JC,FC;E"(FC47:

  "4&.:

 & F DD (  " 9'('   '( (""  "% 6"3.  7$  "%-&99 "9($'%" )"" K L;

99 "9F #9"   "'""$('""(& " '"9'"   '%" )&  '%  &  (&99  "9: & " ' ( $'"( &"&A" (&.A$@(" .('M ( F C & " '('"(   " &99 "9- ) & " ' "9'" &%"   "':  (( (  "  " ( &99  "9  " '('"FN:

& $& FEE("A%"'((""  "%'%"  )"" K L;

#9 ("" " 'A  "$    99  "9 - " ) & " ' )"  "  ('""  )' &"  (' &>' " 4   F   9"$ )& " '@  4"  "%' '('   &* $  ?"(" " (   $   (( (   " (   " '@    A% '$ " " &99 "9FNF

 & ("     )& " " (  ?"( ( "4 9'(' ( "%-& FDD $&99 "9(" @ 9'""$"*  ") )    " %'$   '<'  -  $  "   @ 



/010,/21  31/13   %'$ )    ( " "A   " "$   ) (    &" '@  ( &(""  ""&" '@ (? ""469F 5;;+D2, ;2E;=7:

&')A ( (% @ ? 'F

OOO

*   3 - * ,+- -  +*  -

  /

6/7   8  9   4! ':# -;<

;F '%4F

0F ? ((( "  "(&99 "9F

CF '%" ('(F

1F 9   " (  )& %  9     '  @  (  ('" ( ;2 ? (.   "9" "  " (' ('  "4 9'(' ( $ #<P"Q<9)" E$ E221   $  " >"F  ('"    @  A'F  '" (" K 7 "(") >  )('"" ('"4 "" (('""  )': 47 >  )  "9 "  " %" ((     ('"": 7    "A    (  '  F #"  '"   "   " ''  '''    7 47   7 "3($  "4 9'(' (         ".    )&" (% (' "%4F  '" (   "   * ( %$)" ?" $"")('"" )' &%() ' '>'("' 6 F;C0$;2E ;2=7F

  A99"K  '"( K   "" 44"  

"9(' @   "9"'> """)&-&99"9'(' ("A99



/010,/21