Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
ATAS/297/2008 • CJ GE ATAS/297/2008 Généré par l'IA

OCAI Disability Insurance Appeal Withdrawal

Numéro de cause ATAS/297/2008
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige struck_off
Frais judiciaires sans frais
Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

A decision by the Cantonal Office of Disability Insurance (OCAI) on February 5, 2008, refused medical measures for a child, leading to an appeal filed by the child's treating physician on February 8, 2008. Subsequently, the child's father clarified that the insurance had agreed to cover the hospitalization costs for the child's respiratory distress, prompting him to withdraw the appeal, leading the Cantonal Social Insurance Court to declare the appeal admissible, take note of the withdrawal, strike the case from the roll, and waive the collection of fees.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 413/2008, Art. 297/2008, Art. 108 al. 1 let. a LTF, Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; OCAI Disability Insurance Appeal Withdrawal: Subsequently, the child's father clarified that the insurance had agreed to cover the hospitalization costs for the child's respiratory distress, prompting him to withdraw the appeal, leading the Cantonal Social Insurance Court to declare the appeal admissible, take note of the withdrawal, strike the case from the roll, and waive the collection of fees.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
assurance d'invalidité enfant handicapé suppression de la prestation d'assurance litige d'assurances sociales honoraires d'avocat décisions en matière médicale

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 413/2008
This reference appears in the header but is the case number, not a legal provision used in the dispositive.
Art. 297/2008
This reference appears in the header but is the case number, not a legal provision used in the dispositive.
Art. 108 al. 1 let. a LTF
Although not explicitly cited in the text provided, the instruction to include only provisions cited in the dispositive, and the actual dispositive only containing procedural steps (receivability, withdrawal, striking off, costs), means that if no explicit legal basis for admissibility or the decision itself is listed in orders 1-3, only cost provisions (order 4) should be included. Since no specific legal basis for orders 1-3 or 4 is cited, the array remains empty based on the strict rule.
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF
Although the decision states it waives collection of fees ('Renonce à percevoir un émolument'), it does not explicitly cite the procedural rule governing that decision (e.g., Art. 66 LTF or relevant cantonal law) in the dispositive orders.
Généré par l'IA
A/1463/2008
Appeal Withdrawn After Subsequent Grant of Benefits
A/3784/2008
Appeal Withdrawal in Disability Insurance Case
A/3396/2008
Appeal Withdrawal in Disability Insurance Case
A/955/2009
Withdrawal of Appeal Against Disability Insurance Decision
A/4295/2008
Withdrawal of Disability Insurance Appeal

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 413/2008

This reference appears in the header but is the case number, not a legal provision used in the dispositive.

Art. 297/2008

This reference appears in the header but is the case number, not a legal provision used in the dispositive.

Art. 108 al. 1 let. a LTF

Although not explicitly cited in the text provided, the instruction to include only provisions cited in the dispositive, and the actual dispositive only containing procedural steps (receivability, withdrawal, striking off, costs), means that if no explicit legal basis for admissibility or the decision itself is listed in orders 1-3, only cost provisions (order 4) should be included. Since no specific legal basis for orders 1-3 or 4 is cited, the array remains empty based on the strict rule.

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

Although the decision states it waives collection of fees ('Renonce à percevoir un émolument'), it does not explicitly cite the procedural rule governing that decision (e.g., Art. 66 LTF or relevant cantonal law) in the dispositive orders.

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

REPUBLIQUE ET CANTON DE GENEVE

POUVOIR JUDICIAIRE

A/413/2008 ATAS/297/2008

ARRET

DU TRIBUNAL CANTONAL DES ASSURANCES SOCIALES

Chambre 4 du 12 mars 2008

En la cause

Enfant B_________, soit pour lui son père, Monsieur B_________, recourant domicilié à GENEVE

contre

OFFICE CANTONAL DE L'ASSURANCE-INVALIDITE, sis rue intimé de Lyon 97, GENEVE

Siégeant : Juliana BALDE, Présidente; Nathalie BLOCH et Dominique JECKELMANN, Juges assesseurs

- 2/2 -

Vu la décision de l'Office cantonal de l'assurance-invalidité (ci-après OCAI) du 5 février 2008 refusant des mesures médicales en faveur de l'enfant B_________

Vu le recours interjeté le 8 février 2008 par le Dr L_________, médecin adjoint responsable de l'unité de néonatologie, concernant l'enfant B_________,

Vu le courrier du 24 février 2008 de Monsieur B_________, père des enfants B_________, dans lequel il explique que c'est bien son fils qui a reçu des soins pour une détresse respiratoire, que l'assurance-invalidité a accepté de prendre en charge les frais d'hospitalisation le concernant de sorte qu'il retire le recours ;

LE TRIBUNAL CANTONAL DES ASSURANCES SOCIALES :

Statuant

A la forme :

1. Déclare le recours recevable.

Au fond :

2. Prend acte du retrait du recours.

3. Raye la cause du rôle.

4. Renonce à percevoir un émolument.

La greffière La présidente

Isabelle CASTILLO Juliana BALDE

Une copie conforme du présent arrêt est notifiée aux parties par le greffe le

A/413/2008