210
ZGBCC
CH
CH
Art. 929 Schweizerisches Zivilgesetzbuch (ZGB)
ZGB; Dritte Abteilung: Besitz und Grundbuch; Vierundzwanzigster Titel: Der Besitz; C. Bedeutung; I. Besitzesschutz; 4. Zulässigkeit und Verjährung der Klage
Art. 929 ZGB
Die Klage aus verbotener Eigenmacht ist nur zulässig, wenn der Besitzer sofort, nachdem ihm der Eingriff und der Täter bekannt geworden sind, die Sache zurückfordert oder Beseitigung der Störung verlangt.
Die Klage verjährt nach Ablauf eines Jahres; das mit der Entziehung oder Störung zu laufen beginnt, auch wenn der Besitzer erst später von dem Eingriff und dem Täter Kenntnis erhalten hat.
Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (44)
C/13507/2006 · ge (Art. 929 al. 1 CC)
Possessory Action Time-Barred Despite Change of Ownership
The court mentioned this provision regarding the claimant's forfeiture of action if he did not claim restitution immediately after knowing the fact and the perpetrator, although the main ground for the ruling was based on paragraph 2.
C/13507/2006 · ge (Art. 929 al. 2 CC)
Possessory Action Time-Barred Despite Change of Ownership
The court used this provision to rule that the right of action for reintegration (réintégrande) had expired (périmé) because it was not initiated within one year of the illegal occupation.
C/23666/2015 · ge (art. 926-929 CC)
Oral Lease Dispute and Possessory Claim Regarding Gas Station
Cited in the reasoning regarding the tenant's right to act to cease possession disturbance.
C/25100/2011 · ge (Art. 929 al. 1 CC)
Co-owner Eviction Denial in Joint Property Dispute
Cited when discussing the forfeiture of the possessory action if not brought immediately after knowledge of the disturbance.
C/25100/2011 · ge (Art. 929 al. 2 CC)
Co-owner Eviction Denial in Joint Property Dispute
Cited when discussing the one-year prescription period for the possessory action.
HC.2012.408 · vd (Art. 929 CC)
Vineyard Access Servitude Affirmation Despite Changed Circumstances
The appellant's argument regarding the statute of limitations for possessory action was deemed irrelevant because the injunction was granted on a petitory basis (Art. 737 CC), leading to the rejection of this ground for appeal.
ERZ 2009 270 · gr (Art. 929 ZGB)
Owner Appeals Order to Secure Wall After New Evidence Shows No Excavation Impact
This article was cited by the appellant to argue prescription/forfeiture of the claim, although the court ultimately rejected this plea in its reasoning (para. 3a).
PZ 2008 150 · gr (Art. 926-929 ZGB)
Servitude Right of Way Obstruction vs. Parking Rights Dispute
Cited in the reasoning to refer to the relevant section of the Civil Code on possessory protection.
PZ 2007 201 · gr (Art. 929 Abs. 2 ZGB)
Appellee v. Appellant (Property Protection Order Appeal)
Used to determine that the claims regarding older incidents were time-barred (verwirkt) under the possessory protection rules.
PZ 2007 74 · gr (Art. 929 cpv. 1 CC)
Tenant's Possessory Action Time-Barred by One-Year Limitation
The appeal was rejected because the request for injunction was time-barred under the one-year deadline for bringing the action for spoliation of possession.
PZ 2007 45 · gr (Art. 929 Abs. 1 ZGB)
Neighboring Co-Owners v. Retaining Wall Construction Encroachment
Cited in the reasoning regarding the requirement for the complainant to have acted immediately against the disturbance of possession.
PZ 2007 45 · gr (Art. 929 Abs. 2 ZGB)
Neighboring Co-Owners v. Retaining Wall Construction Encroachment
Cited in the reasoning to discuss whether the right to complain has expired due to the passage of time.
PZ 2006 204 · gr (Art. 929 Abs. 1 ZGB)
Servitude Holder Exclusive Use vs. Property Owner Lock Removal
Cited in the reasoning (point 5a) regarding the immediate requirement for bringing a possessory action.
PZ 2006 136 · gr (Art. 929 Abs. 2 ZGB)
Property Owner Livestock Crossing Dispute Over Possessory Order
The appeal was granted because the claim for protection of possession would have been time-barred (prescribed) according to this provision.
PZ 2006 136 · gr (Art. 929 ZGB)
Property Owner Livestock Crossing Dispute Over Possessory Order
Cited in the reasoning to explain why the defense regarding the lack of immediate protest (unverzüglicher Protest) was relevant to the final decision to lift the order.