Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
11 08 155 • KG LU 11 08 155 Generato dall'IA

Pre-emptive Right Enforcement: Security for Costs Requirement Upheld

Numero d'incarto 11 08 155
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Svizzera · Canton Lucerna (CH-LU)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Spese processuali a carico del ricorrente / reclamante

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

In a dispute concerning the enforcement of a statutory pre-emptive right over a farm, the court upheld the lower court's decision requiring the claimant to provide security for costs amounting to CHF 45,000 due to his apparent lack of assets. The court reasoned that the proffered surety, offered under a specific article of the Code of Obligations, did not qualify as a valid form of security under the relevant procedural law, as it was conditional and did not offer the immediate satisfaction guaranteed by the statutorily enumerated forms of security like cash, securities, or bank guarantees. Furthermore, the court affirmed the initial calculation of the dispute value, which determined the required security amount, based on the higher monetary interest asserted by the defendants in maintaining the agreed sale price over the claimant's interest in acquiring the property at its capitalized earning value.

Regesto Legislator

Ufficiale

§§ 18 Abs. 1 und 127 Abs. 1 ZPO; § 3 Abs. 2 KoV. Die Schadlosbürgschaft gemäss Art. 495 Abs. 3 OR fällt nicht unter die Sicherstellungsarten gemäss § 127 Abs. 1 ZPO. Streitwert bei Klage auf Anerkennung und Durchsetzung eines Vorkaufsrechts bezüglich eines landwirtschaftlichen Gewerbes. | Zivilprozessrecht

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
prestazione di garanzia spese di esecuzione valore litigioso garanzie procedurali diritto di proprietà diritto delle obbligazioni

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA
Generato dall'IA

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 127 Abs. 1 ZPO

The court confirmed that the offered indemnity bond does not meet the security types specified in this provision.

§ 18 Abs. 1 ZPO

This provision was used to determine that the value in dispute corresponds to the plaintiff's request, specifically the purchase price.

§ 3 Abs. 2 KoV

This provision was applied to set the value in dispute at the higher amount (the sale price) because the parties' interests were unequal.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Rechtsprechung Luzern

Instanz: · Obergericht

Abteilung: · I. Kammer

Rechtsgebiet: · Zivilprozessrecht

Entscheiddatum: · 16.02.2009

Fallnummer: · 11 08 155

LGVE: · 2009 I Nr. 21

Leitsatz: · §§ 18 Abs. 1 und 127 Abs. 1 ZPO; § 3 Abs. 2 KoV. Die Schadlosbürgschaft gemäss Art. 495 Abs. 3 OR fällt nicht unter die Sicherstellungsarten gemäss § 127 Abs. 1 ZPO. Streitwert bei Klage auf Anerkennung und Durchsetzung eines Vorkaufsrechts bezüglich eines landwirtschaftlichen Gewerbes.

Rechtskraft: · Diese Entscheidung ist rechtskräftig.