Art. 28h Schweizerisches Zivilgesetzbuch (ZGB)

HG250037 · zh (Art. 28h ZGB)

Book Retailer v. Publisher: Right of Counterstatement and Trade Secret Protection

Used to determine that counter-statements must be concise and limited to the subject of the contested statement, and can be refused if obviously incorrect or against the law or good morals.

HG210071 · zh (Art. 28h Abs. 1 ZGB)

Applicant Company v. Respondent Company: Right of Reply for Alleged Selective Citation

Cited in the reasoning for the granted counter-statement (Ziff. 1) regarding the required concise form, although the operative part only cites Art. 28k.

102 2017 345 · fr (art. 28h CC)

Right of Reply Enforcement Rejected Due to Lack of Conciseness and Factual Limitation

The rejection of the appeal is based on the reasoning that the proposed right of reply did not meet the requirements of conciseness established by this article, as confirmed by the court's final decision to reject the appeal, which upholds the lower court's finding regarding the non-compliance with this provision.

AbR.1986.87.Nr.2 · ow (Art. 28h Abs. 1 ZGB)

Media Company Correction Does Not Negate Counter-Statement Right; Politician's Recusal Statement Subject to Counter-Statement, But Only if Personally Relevant

Cited in the context of formal requirements for a counter-representation.

AbR.1986.87.Nr.2 · ow (Art. 28h Abs. 2 ZGB)

Media Company Correction Does Not Negate Counter-Statement Right; Politician's Recusal Statement Subject to Counter-Statement, But Only if Personally Relevant

Cited as grounds for refusing a counter-representation if it is obviously incorrect or violates law or morality.

2014.04.15.zr.1 · bl (Art. 28h Abs. 1 ZGB)

Foundation Denied Right of Reply Over Media Article

Specifies that the text of a counter-statement must be concise and limited to the matter of the contested statement.

2014.04.15.zr.1 · bl (Art. 28h Abs. 2 ZGB)

Foundation Denied Right of Reply Over Media Article

Allows refusal of a counter-statement if it is manifestly incorrect or violates law or good morals.

2014.04.15.zr.2 · bl (Art. 28h Abs. 2 ZGB)

Foundation's Political Intentions Proven in Defamation Case

This provision allows for the refusal of a counterstatement if it is obviously incorrect or violates law or good morals, which was the decisive factor in this case.

400.14.32 · bl (Art. 28h Abs. 1 ZGB)

Foundation's Claim for Counter-Statement Dismissed Over Opinion and Factual Association

Rule for the form and content of the counter-statement, requiring it to be concise and limited to the subject of the challenged statement.

400.14.32 · bl (Art. 28h Abs. 2 ZGB)

Foundation's Claim for Counter-Statement Dismissed Over Opinion and Factual Association

Grounds for refusal of a counter-statement if it is obviously incorrect or violates law or good morals.

400.14.33 · bl (Art. 28h Abs. 1 ZGB)

Foundation's Counter-Statement Against Political Allegations Denied

Governs the form and content of the counter-statement, requiring it to be concise and limited to the challenged statement.

400.14.33 · bl (Art. 28h Abs. 2 ZGB)

Foundation's Counter-Statement Against Political Allegations Denied

Allows refusal of a counter-statement if it is manifestly incorrect or violates law or good morals.

HC.2012.498 · vd (Art. 28h al. 1 CC)

Appellant v. Media Company (Right of Reply Regarding Diamond Allegations)

This provision was cited to affirm that the proposed response text was not manifestly inaccurate, thus justifying the admission of the right of reply.

HC.2011.299 · vd (Art. 28h CC)

Company Appeal on Denial of Right of Reply to Critical Media Reports

The court cited this article when assessing whether the proposed response text exceeded the scope of the contested presentation.

11.2004.92 · ti (art. 28h cpv. 1 CC)

Appellant v. Former Colleague (Right of Reply Scope)

Cited in the context of the scope and conciseness required for the content of the response, even though the claim was ultimately rejected on other grounds.