842
WFGLOGLPRA
CH
CH
Art. 36 Bundesgesetz vom 21. März 2003 über die Förderung von preisgünstigem Wohnraum (WFG) - Rückbürgschaften
WFG
Art. 36 WFG · Rückbürgschaften
Das Bundesamt kann Rückbürgschaften eingehen für Bürgschaften von Hypothekar-Bürgschaftseinrichtungen, wenn damit die Finanzierung preisgünstiger Mietwohnungen von Trägern des gemeinnützigen Wohnungsbaus sichergestellt wird.
Rückbürgschaften werden gewährt, wenn die Träger des gemeinnützigen Wohnungsbaus über Eigenkapital in einer bestimmten Höhe verfügen.
Der Bundesrat regelt die angemessene Verteilung der Risiken zwischen den Hypothekar-Bürgschaftseinrichtungen und dem Bund und legt die Höhe des erforderlichen Eigenkapitals fest.
Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (15)
12.2018.43 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 3 lett. d LOG)
Recusal Motion Jurisdiction Transfer Due to Procedural Law Conflict
Cited as the legal basis for designating the Judge of the District of Riviera to handle the case.
11.2009.2 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Easement Violation: Partition Wall and Compost Bins Obstructing Light and View
Cited in the reasoning to confirm that the appeal was admissible based on the litigation value.
16.2010.109 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Employer's Delayed Termination Appeal Dismissed for Procedural Flaw
Cited in the reasoning to establish the correct means of appeal (cassation appeal) based on the litigation value.
11.2008.123 · ti (Art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Landslide Damage from Natural Rockfall on Adjacent Property
Used to confirm the admissibility of the appeal based on the litigation value.
16.2009.19 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Encroachment Dispute: Gutter Demolition Upheld
This provision was cited in the factual background regarding the inadmissibility of the appeal to the civil chamber of the Court of Appeal due to the low value in dispute, although it does not appear in the dispositive orders (orders 1, 2, 3).
11.2006.48 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Property Owners' Wall Costs Appeal Nullified Due to Substitute Assessor's Lack of Jurisdiction
Cited to determine the value in dispute (valore litigioso) for the appeal proceedings.
11.2005.127 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Servitude Enforcement Regarding View Obstruction by Rooftop Parking
Cited in the reasoning (Point 1) to establish the admissibility of the appeal based on the determined litigation value.
16.2007.13 · ti (art. 36 LOG)
Appeal Regarding Excessive Costs and Indemnity in Ancillary Expense Dispute
Cited alongside Art. 15 CPC for treating the 'appeal' as a cassation appeal.
11.2004.102 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Public Figure v. Magazine: Defamation and Personality Rights Regarding Political Profile
Cited in the reasoning (consid. 1) to confirm the appeal exceeded the required threshold value.
11.2004.46 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Servitude Extinguishment: Continued Interest Despite Obstacles and Alternative Access
Cited in the reasoning to confirm the appeal was admissible based on the dispute value.
11.2004.51 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Vehicular Right of Way Interim Measures Appeal Inadmissibility Due to Low Litigation Value Threshold
Used to determine that the original case should have been promoted under the simplified one-instance procedure based on the value in dispute being below the threshold for an ordinary action.
11.2006.11 · ti (art. 36 LOG)
Assessor-Secretary Jurisdiction Over Provisional Maintenance Order Challenged
Cited in the reasoning regarding the Secretary Assessor's substitution power in Ticino.
11.2009.2 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Property Servitude Dispute Over View and Light Obstruction
Cited in the reasoning (point 1) to confirm the appeal was admissible based on the determined litigation value, but not explicitly used in the final orders I, II, or III.
12.2010.158 · ti (art. 36 cpv. 1 LOG)
Employee Termination for Persistent Non-Payment of Wages Upheld
Used implicitly to confirm that the appeal to the Cantonal Court was the correct remedy based on the value of the dispute.
36.2022.5 · ti (Art. 36 LOG)
Insured vs. Healthcare Insurer Regarding Late Fees and Administrative Costs
Cited in the reasoning (point 1) by reference to the single-judge composition rule in the Cantonal Law (LOG), which relates to internal procedure but is not a provision of the Federal Tribunal used in the *final orders* of the Federal Tribunal itself (this appears to be a Cantonal decision referencing its own procedural law, LOG, which is not directly cited in the final orders 1, 2, 3).