370.100
VRGLGA
CH-GR
CH-GR
Art. 25 Gesetz über die Verwaltungsrechtspflege (VRG) - Widerruf
Allgemeine Grundsätze des Verfahrens - Erledigung
Art. 25 VRG · Widerruf
1. Die Verwaltungsbehörde kann einen rechtskräftigen Entscheid von Amtes wegen oder auf Gesuch hin ändern oder aufheben, wenn
a) sich die Sach- oder Rechtslage gegenüber der ursprünglichen Entscheidungsgrundlage geändert hat und
b) nicht überwiegende öffentliche oder private Interessen dem Widerruf entgegenstehen.
2. Erleidet jemand, der im Vertrauen auf einen Entscheid gutgläubig Vorkehren getroffen hat, durch den Widerruf unverschuldet einen Schaden, hat er Anspruch auf Entschädigung.
3. Spezialgesetzliche Widerrufsregelungen und die Revision bleiben vorbehalten.
Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (42)
PVG 2017 7 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 VRG)
Intercantonal Nursing Care Financing: Domicile Principle Affirmed Pending Federal Law
The provision was used to affirm the conditions for the revocation of the cost guarantee (Widerruf der Kostengutsprache).
PVG 2024 18 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 VRG)
Judicial Review of Post-Reconsideration Confirmation Decisions
The court limited its review of the appeal against the decision confirming the reconsideration request to determining whether the grounds for revocation under this article were present before the lower authority.
R 2023 70 · gr (Art. 25 VRG)
Appellant v. Municipality: First-Residence Obligation on Property Expansion
The court used this article to justify the power to revoke the administrative act (Widerruf).
PVG 2023 1 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 2 VRG)
Distinction Between General State Liability and Reliance Liability
This provision establishes the basis for liability founded on trust (Vertrauenshaftung) as special statutory liability.
U 2022 96 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 lit. a VRG)
Family Reunification Appeal Dismissed Due to Late Application and Insufficient Hardship
This procedural provision defines the general ground (change in factual or legal circumstances) required for a reopening of the case (Wiedererwägung), which the court ultimately found not met.
U 2018 73 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 2 VRG)
Winter Sports Business vs. Canton/Municipality: Reliance on Erroneous Building Permit
The appeal was partially granted based on liability arising from justified reliance on the administrative decision (Vertrauenshaftung).
R 2020 36 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 VRG)
Appeal Regarding Construction Deviation Fines and Façade Slats
The court confirmed that the conditions for revocation of the building permit, which would have allowed the authority to demand slats on the first floor, were not met.
R 2020 38 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 VRG)
Property Owner v. Municipality Regarding Facade Restoration and Wooden Louvers
Cited to confirm that the requirements for the authority to revise (revoke) the lawful decision (regarding the 1st floor slat requirement) were not met.
R 2020 93 · gr (Art. 25 cpv. 1 LGA)
Construction Application Rejections Upheld Due to Incompleteness
Cited in the reasoning to discuss the modification or revocation of administrative decisions based on changed circumstances, relevant to the good faith analysis.
R 2020 39 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 VRG)
Glazing Installation on Terraces Barred by Prior Building Permit Decision
Cited in the reasoning that sets the criteria for revoking a final building permit, although the court ultimately found these criteria unmet.
R 2020 85 · gr (Art. 25 VRG)
Appeal Against Refusal to Revoke Building Permits for Demolition and Expansion
The court applied this provision to assess the legality of the administrative body's decision to refrain from revoking the building permits.
R 2019 22 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 VRG)
Objectors v. Municipality (Building Permit Demolition and Construction)
This article was cited when addressing and rejecting the request for revocation (Widerruf) of the building permit because it was not yet legally final.
U 2019 20 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 lit. a und b VRG)
Unemployed Individual Seeks Reimbursement for Rent Paid to Parents Without Sufficient Proof
This article setting conditions for reconsideration is mentioned in the reasoning but not cited in the final orders.
U 2019 10 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 lit. a und b VRG)
Social Assistance Housing Cost Cap Reconsideration Refusal Upheld
Cited in the reasoning section to determine that the prerequisites for accepting the application for reconsideration were not met.
S 2016 112 · gr (Art. 25 Abs. 1 lit. a VRG)
Intercantonal Care Costs: Retroactive Reimbursement vs. Residence Principle Application
Applied to justify the revocation of the cost guarantee due to a change in legal circumstances (BGE 140 V 563).