784.10 FMGLTC

CH

Art. 35 Fernmeldegesetz (FMG) - Inanspruchnahme von Grund und Boden

FMG; 5. Kapitel: Fernmeldeanlagen

Originalquelle öffnen Gesamter Erlass (109 Artikel) Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Art. 35 FMG · Inanspruchnahme von Grund und Boden

Die Eigentümerinnen und Eigentümer von Boden im Gemeingebrauch (wie Strassen, Fusswege, öffentliche Plätze, Flüsse, Seen sowie Ufer) sind verpflichtet, den Anbieterinnen von Fernmeldediensten die Benutzung dieses Bodens für Bau und Betrieb von Leitungen und öffentlichen Sprechstellen zu bewilligen, sofern diese Einrichtungen den Gemeingebrauch nicht beeinträchtigen.

Anbieterinnen von Fernmeldediensten nehmen Rücksicht auf den Zweck und die Nutzung des in Anspruch genommenen Grundstücks und tragen die Kosten für die Wiederherstellung des ursprünglichen Zustandes. Sie sind verpflichtet, ihre Leitungen zu verlegen, wenn von der Grundeigentümerin oder vom Grundeigentümer eine Benützung des Grundstücks beabsichtigt ist, die sich mit der Leitungsführung nicht verträgt.

Der Bundesrat regelt die Einzelheiten, namentlich die Koordinationspflicht der Anbieterinnen sowie die Voraussetzungen für die Verlegung von Leitungen und öffentlichen Sprechstellen.

Die Bewilligung ist in einem einfachen und raschen Verfahren zu erteilen. Ausser kostendeckenden Gebühren darf eine Entschädigung für die Inanspruchnahme von Grund und Boden, soweit sie den Gemeingebrauch nicht beeinträchtigt, nicht verlangt werden.

← Art. 34a FMG Fernmeldegesetz (FMG) - Zweck Art. 35a FMG →

Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (26)

VWBES.2002.282 · so (Art. 35 Abs. 2 FMG)

Telecommunications Provider Challenges Void Administrative Fees and Usage Charges on Public Roads

Cited in relation to the appeal point concerning the condition requiring the concessionaire to bear all costs for relocations due to road corrections or other public works, deeming it contrary to federal law.

VWBES.2002.282 · so (Art. 35 Abs. 4 FMG)

Telecommunications Provider Challenges Void Administrative Fees and Usage Charges on Public Roads

Cited to confirm that no compensation for the use of ground and soil may be demanded as long as public use is not impaired.

VWBES.2002.282 · so (Art. 35 FMG)

Telecommunications Provider Challenges Void Administrative Fees and Usage Charges on Public Roads

Used to rule that the cantonal User Fee for infrastructure use, if it exceeds cost-covering fees, is incompatible with federal law because it constitutes an unauthorized compensation for land use.

FI.2024.0020 · vd (Art. 35 al. 4 LTC)

Telecommunications Provider v. Municipality: Permitting Fees for Public Domain Excavation

This provision is the main ground used to allow the appeal, concluding that only the administrative fee allowed under this article can be collected.

52.2019.448 · ti (art. 35 LTC)

Telecommunications Provider Fee Challenge Against Road Maintenance Consortium

The main ground for accepting the appeal was the violation of this federal law provision concerning the gratuitous use of common areas by telecommunications service providers.

WBE.2016.424 · ag (Art. 35 Abs. 1 FMG)

Telecommunications Line Placement and Federal Preemption

This provision governs the requirements for granting permits for the use of public land for telecommunication lines and facilities, stating that such use must be permitted if it does not impair public use.

2017.04.05.vv.4 · bl (Art. 35 FMG)

Telecommunications Provider v. Cantonal Road Authority (Permit for Access Shafts)

Cited as the legal basis for granting or denying permits for the use of public land for telecommunication lines and access shafts.

AGVE.2017.30 · ag (Art. 35 Abs. 1 FMG)

Federal Telecommunications Law and Road Shaft Permitting for Signal Conversion Devices

Used to establish that devices converting optical signals to electromagnetic signals, and the access shafts for them, are considered part of the lines and thus fall under federal telecommunications law for authorization.

AGVE.2017.30 · ag (Art. 35 Abs. 1 FMG)

Federal Law Governs Fiber Optic to Copper Signal Converters in Road Shafts

This provision is cited as the legal basis for granting permits for the use of public land for telecommunication lines, including the devices (µCANs) and access shafts necessary for their operation.

VB.2014.00108 · zh (Art. 35 FMG)

Road Project Relocation Costs: Telecommunication Provider Bears Expense

This article is cited as the legal basis for determining that the telecommunications service provider must bear the costs of relocating its lines due to the road project.

A-1239/2012 (Art. 35 Abs. 1 FMG)

National Road Authority to Fund Cable Conduit Relocation

Obligates owners of common land to permit telecommunications providers the use of this land for lines, provided they do not impede common use.

A-1239/2012 (Art. 35 Abs. 2 FMG)

National Road Authority to Fund Cable Conduit Relocation

Requires telecommunications providers to relocate their lines if the landowner intends to use the property in a way incompatible with the lines.

FI.2013.0012 · vd (Art. 35 LTC)

Telecommunications Company v. Municipality Regarding Fiber Optic Line Installation Fees

The ruling is based on the application and interpretation of this Federal Law concerning the use of public domain by telecommunications concessionaires, which dictates the conditions for charging fees (emoluments) versus compensation (dédommagement).

AC.2011.0243 · vd (art. 35 al. 4 LTC)

Telecommunications Provider v. Municipality (Trenching Permit Fees Appeal Jurisdiction)

Cited in the reasoning as the federal basis governing the calculation of administrative fees for telecommunication installations, which was the core subject of the dispute.

2006.64 · bl (Art. 35 Abs. 2 FMG)

Telecommunications Concessionaire v. Canton: Public-Law Contract Validity and Statute of Limitations

Cited regarding the obligation to restore the original condition after laying lines and the responsibility for costs.