Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
ATAS/204/2007 • CJ GE ATAS/204/2007 Généré par l'IA

Tax Amendments Retroactive Application Overruling Judicial Judgments

Numéro de cause ATAS/204/2007
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The case concerns the validity of retroactive legislative amendments concerning the calculation of certain financial obligations, where the amendments altered past tax years by changing the underlying statutory basis used in prior judicial interpretations. The court reasoned that while the legislature generally has the power to amend tax statutes, the amendments here, by retroactively changing the definition underpinning prior tax liabilities determined by the courts, improperly infringed upon the finality of prior judicial judgments and violated due process rights by imposing new liabilities for completed past transactions based on altered statutory terms applied retrospectively.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF, Art. 64 LTF; Tax Amendments Retroactive Application Overruling Judicial Judgments: The court reasoned that while the legislature generally has the power to amend tax statutes, the amendments here, by retroactively changing the definition underpinning prior tax liabilities determined by the courts, improperly infringed upon the finality of prior judicial judgments and violated due process rights by imposing new liabilities for completed past transactions based on altered statutory terms applied retrospectively.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
modification législative assujettissement à l'impôt prétention légale interprétation de l'arrêt législation rétroactive cause de l'obligation

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Généré par l'IA

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

This provision was applied in the dispositive to order the appellant to pay the court costs.

Art. 64 LTF

This provision was applied in the dispositive regarding the costs incurred by the respondent, specifically concerning the provision of legal aid.

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%     

    

   -516-  

)  * +)&"$"3(#75448!9#$&&'0 ( 5443! )++       ) ,,  -   :-&;  <"'" %='"'")("'$% #&'"#")'75442>

'?")("'$")$'&) $''"8/@>

)$!&$'$&*'!'A'$6#5443>

"&$("5A5443!) A'">

&""5BA(544B! 7"$"$?&' &.C'= '  ## %  9   > = -  $'7  &&'56A544B>

 &  " B (#7 544B!  9"'   &&' ")?&'! )   9#$ 7"$="'")$%'';$''"#"; 2A5443>

) #&' & " #"' )' '  50 9$( 5440> = )   &"'  " )"  ( " ( " $"&'' " #D# A! ? '# "= )$ )'  $"&'7!   # " '(  #& "  #C$ " '(   " ''' %  '$ #'= :&7;# #7!(?!E<!="&>=) .""$ = ' '   "& A( 5446! "' "  'E    "=   $'$ ''$&$")E>

&''";(='F

G' #&' ") '? ")7''#' " 23@   " 24@!  ( " )HE &&#'!  = (' % )' ") "#-' ")("'$ "& '7 5442:"E$")("'$32@<>

*'"E$")("'$"244@"&A(5446!(")EE('" )$''"'$"'##'?E!=('%)'")''; ")("'$"&2(5446:'IJJI5 <>

9?"$&%2)4449IG>

$     =)"''('&'>

)('""'?&'"'"=#'9&$''E>





1234415443  -616-  

 $ ,%"-  "#! $%  !$ %$"

) .//    0 1 

2/ * '' 3 0. 4 5  %67

2I '%) ")"'("""$'I

5I )."#''="7I

6I "# K'#$ % (  '  ## " 2)444 9I! % '' " &'&'%9'"$&I

8I &&'"K'I34 !9#&'"=K&('9# '&$'D'""$"64A";'9'&& ##"$"$ 79$"$"!,CLMC9=B!B448   !'?#&I"$&'D'&E$I#$#"'F <"=?'#'="$'"$7''&" "$''=$>7<?&&=#'9'#&("#"'' '"$><&'E'"&$''I,#$# '' &  ' $$#' $#$$  '' < 7< ' < -"!  79$"$"&&'#';=K "("$(7I#$#"#'#. " &(! = ' A'!  =  "$ ''=$ ' K(&& " =$'$?&$"$':'I265!24B'24J<I E99;  $"'F     -  N O   

 & 9# " &$' D' ' '9$ ? &' ' K99 9$"$ " &E99



1234415443