150.1 VRGCPJA

CH-FR

Art. 95 Code de procédure et de juridiction administrative (CPJA) - Pouvoir de décision - Etendue

Procédure - Procédure de recours - Décision sur recours

Ouvrir la source officielle Texte complet (166 Articles) Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Art. 95 CPJA · Etendue

1. Le Tribunal cantonal ne peut pas aller au-delà des conclusions des parties, à l'avantage ou au détriment de celles-ci, sauf en matière de contributions publiques et d'assurances sociales.

2. Une autorité spéciale de la juridiction administrative peut modifier la décision attaquée à l'avantage ou au détriment d'une partie, sans égard à ses conclusions.

3. L'autorité n'est en aucun cas liée par les motifs invoqués par les parties.

← Art. 94 CPJA Code de procédure et de juridiction administrative (CPJA) - Objet du code Art. 96 CPJA →

Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (35)

602 2023 170 · fr (art. 95 al. 1 CPJA)

Municipal Development Plan Revision Appeals: Zoning Disputes and Unbuilt Reserve Limits

Used to justify the Court not reviewing the approval of certain parcels maintained in ZRFD, due to the prohibition of reformatio in pejus.

601 2024 88 · fr (art. 95 al. 3 CPJA)

Legal Aid for Review of Institutional Therapeutic Measure

Cited in the reasoning as the basis allowing the Court to examine the merits even if the appellant did not raise the nullity ground in the appeal (point I and II of the dispositive relate to the finding of nullity and rejection of the appeal on the merits).

601 2023 83 · fr (art. 95 al. 1 CPJA)

Public Employment Status in Private Law Contract Dispute and Wrongful Dismissal Indemnity

Cited in the reasoning regarding the exclusion of interest and the 13th salary from the awarded indemnity.

601 2022 94 · fr (art. 95 al. 1 CPJA)

Procedural Flaws in Public Servant Dismissal

Mentioned in relation to the absence of an express claim for interest on the awarded indemnity.

602 2021 153 · fr (art. 95 al. 3 CPJA)

Road Authority v. Expropriation Commission (Roundabout Compensation)

Cited to confirm the court's ability to rule on grounds not raised before the Commission (regarding the 'Vorgarten' issue).

601 2024 20 · fr (Art. 95 Abs. 1 VRG)

Physician Employment Reference Dispute over Omitted Conduct Statements

The court stated it cannot rule to the detriment of the parties' requests when dismissing the claims regarding the wording of the conduct section.

602 2023 111 · fr (art. 95 al. 3 CPJA)

Appeal Against Construction Permit Denied Due to Lack of Standing

Cited to confirm that the Cantonal Tribunal applies the law ex officio when examining the admissibility of the opposition.

602 2022 74 · fr (art. 95 al. 1 CPJA)

Appeal Concerning Land Rezoning Refusal Based on Built-Up Area Definition and Development Plan Restrictions

This procedural article was cited in the reasoning when discussing the court's inability to go beyond the parties' conclusions, which influences the ultimate dismissal of the appeal.

602 2023 123 · fr (art. 95 al. 1 CPJA)

Property Owner v. Administrative Decision Suspending Building Permit Based on Pending Legal Challenges to Development Plan

Cited in the reasoning regarding the limits of the court's power to modify the land use zone allocation, which is implicitly confirmed by the court's decision to annul and remit rather than modify the outcome itself.

602 2022 240 · fr (art. 95 al. 1 CPJA)

Municipality v. Cantonal Authority on Local Development Plan Revision and Densification Criteria

Cited to justify not ruling on the IBUS increase for certain non-litigious parcels, as it would constitute a reformatio in peius.

602 2022 232 · fr (Art. 95 Abs. 1 VRG)

Property Owners Ordered to Cease Unpermitted Commercial Use Pending Retroactive Permit Application

Cited by the court in the reasoning section (E. 4.4) as a principle related to the decision, although the article itself does not appear in the final orders, it refers to the principle governing review of the interim order regarding the time frame of the usage prohibition.

602 2021 118 · fr (art. 95 al. 1 CPJA)

Land Use Plan Revision Appeal Regarding Building Zone Denial

Cited in the reasoning to justify why the court could not rule on the legality of other parcels' zoning, which is a procedural limitation relevant to the scope of the final order.

602 2021 119 · fr (Art. 95 al. 1 CPJA)

Municipality Development Plan Zoning Rejection Upheld

The court noted it could not rule beyond the parties' conclusions, except for public contributions and social security, in examining the merits of the case.

601 2019 20 · fr (art. 95 al. 1 CPJA)

Wrongful Dismissal Following Acquittal in Data Manipulation Case

Cited as the reason why no interest was awarded on the indemnity.

602 2022 146 · fr (Art. 95 Abs. 3 VRG)

Appeal Dismissed Regarding Inclusion of Watercourse Tributary in Zoning Plan

The court noted it could not change the challenged decision to the detriment of the parties.