780.1
MOBGLMOB
CH-FR
CH-FR
Art. 10 Loi sur la mobilité (LMob) - Infrastructures de mobilité
Dispositions générales - Notions et définitions - Infrastructures et itinéraires de mobilité
Art. 10 LMob · Infrastructures de mobilité
1. Sont des infrastructures de mobilité tous les ouvrages et installations qui servent à la mobilité.
2. Sont compris dans les infrastructures notamment les routes, les chemins, les chemins de fers, les remontées à câble, les installations destinées au transport aérien, les voies navigables et leurs abords ainsi que les places d'arrêt, de chargement ou de rassemblement, les installations portuaires et les gares.
3. Les types d'infrastructures au sens de la présente loi sont
a) les routes publiques;
b) les chemins de mobilité douce;
c) les infrastructures dédiées au transport public.
Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (13)
BB.2009.46 (Art. 10 Abs. 5 BÜPF)
Appeal on Incidental Findings Dismissed for Lack of Specificity
The appeal was filed in accordance with this provision, which allows appeals against decisions regarding monitoring.
Arr.t.2009.871 · vd (Art. 10 LSCPT)
Appeal Against Retroactive Surveillance Order in Robbery Investigation
The appeal was evaluated based on the conditions for appeal under Art. 10 para. 5 LSCPT, even though the operative part only cites Art. 229 al. 4 CPP and Art. 10 LSCPT (as part of the initial listing of relevant law).
P/3983/2008 · ge (art. 10 al. 5 LSCPT)
Appellant v. State: Lawfulness of Real-Time Surveillance for Unrelated Offenses
Cited in the reasoning section concerning the admissibility of the appeal against the telephone surveillance.
AC070020 · zh (Art. 10 Abs. 2 und 5 BÜPF)
Appeal Regarding Apportionment of Criminal Proceeding Costs in Narcotics and Money Laundering Case
Used in the reasoning to establish that the failure to notify the telephone surveillance violated the legal framework, leading to the costs not being charged to the appellant (though this article is not directly in the final dispositive orders 1-6, it forms the basis for the decision in order 1 via the reasoning derived from it).
AC040127 · zh (Art. 10 Abs. 2 und 4 BÜPF)
Appeal Granted Due to Refusal of On-Site Inspection
Cited in connection with the duty to notify the supervised person about the surveillance measures, but the court held that cantonal law applied as BÜPF was not yet in force.
KA 04 94 · lu (Art. 10 BÜPF)
Telephone Surveillance Authorization Challenge and Procedural Consistency
The appeal was dismissed based on the provisions of this article, which governs the right to appeal against surveillance orders.
AC070020 · zh (Art. 10 BÜPF)
Cantonal Court Reduces Criminal Investigation Costs Imposed on Convicted Drug Offender
Cited in the context of the lack of formal notification regarding telephone surveillance which resulted in the costs not being laid to the appellant's charge.
TPF 2004 18 (Art. 10 Abs. 2 BÜPF)
Prosecutor Denied Delay in Wiretap Notification
Establishes the general principle that notification must be given after each surveillance measure.
TPF 2004 18 (Art. 10 Abs. 3 BÜPF)
Prosecutor Denied Delay in Wiretap Notification
Allows for exceptional postponement of notification under certain conditions.
TPF 2004 23 (Art. 10 Abs. 3 lit. a BÜPF)
Waiver of Surveillance Notification Granted Due to National Security Concerns
This provision was used to justify the exceptional waiver of notification of surveillance due to overriding public interest, specifically the fight against organized crime and terrorism.
TPF 2005 199 (Art. 10 Abs. 3 lit. a BÜPF)
Postponement of Notification of Telephone Surveillance in International Clan Investigation
This provision was used to justify the exceptional circumstances allowing for a deferral of notification of the telephone surveillance due to potential risks to ongoing investigations.
TPF 2006 229 (Art. 10 Abs. 3 lit. a BÜPF)
Deferral of Notification of Telephone Surveillance Due to Ongoing Foreign Investigations
This provision allows for a delay in notification of surveillance measures when the public interest in criminal prosecution outweighs the interest of the affected parties in immediate information.
TPF 2008 3 (Art. 10 al. 3 LSCPT)
Prosecution Denied Request to Withhold Surveillance Details
The court did not enter into the merits of the request for waiver of communication of surveillance measures because it was not presented immediately before the conclusion of the investigation or the discontinuation of proceedings.