165.100
LPAMMVwVG
CH-TI
CH-TI
Art. 86 LPAmm Legge sulla procedura amministrativa (LPAmm)
LPAmm
Art. 86 LPAmm
1 Se il Tribunale cantonale amministrativo annulla la decisione impugnata, esso decide nel merito.
2 Il Tribunale cantonale amministrativo può annullare la decisione impugnata e rinviare la causa per nuovo giudizio all’istanza inferiore, segnatamente nei casi in cui quest’ultima non è entrata nel merito, ha accertato la fattispecie in modo incompleto o ha violato norme essenziali di procedura.
3 I motivi della sentenza di rinvio devono essere posti a fondamento della nuova decisione.
4 Il Tribunale cantonale amministrativo può modificare la decisione impugnata a vantaggio o a pregiudizio di una parte.
5 Se il Tribunale cantonale amministrativo intende modificare la decisione impugnata a pregiudizio di una parte, deve informarla della sua intenzione e darle la possibilità di esprimersi.
Decisioni giudiziarie che applicano questa disposizione (28)
52.2022.299 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Contractor Challenge to Public Contract Cancellation Based on Financial Sustainability Claims
Cited as the procedural basis for remanding the case for a new decision if necessary.
52.2021.302 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Vineyard Owners v. State: Wildlife Capture Authorization and Fencing Feasibility
Cited as the basis for remitting the case file to the lower instance for further investigation if necessary.
52.2021.322 · ti (Art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Appeal Against Fine for Unauthorized Flyer Posting: Annulment Due to Lack of Confrontation with Identifying Officer
The court used this provision to justify annulling the challenged decision and remitting the case for a new judgment due to incomplete factual assessment or procedural violations.
52.2017.520 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Property Owners v. Municipality: Yard Storage and Building Permit Regularization Appeal
Cited in the reasoning section regarding the possibility of remitting the case for further investigation (Order 1.2 frames the setting aside/remittal in Order 1.1).
52.2017.294 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Grape Loss Compensation Claim Remanded for Investigation into Culling Authorization Request
Cited in the reasoning section regarding the possibility of remitting the case for further investigation.
52.2018.66 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Public Contract Award Challenge Based on Director Qualification Equivalence
Cited regarding the possibility of remitting the case to the contracting authority for a new decision if investigative gaps exist.
52.2015.51 · ti (Art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Consortium Road Use Regulation Competency Dispute
Cited in the final orders for remanding the case to the lower authority for a new decision after accepting the appeal.
52.2016.629 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Challenge to Ultra-Broadband Plan Award Due to Insufficient Reference Verification
Cited in reasoning as the rule allowing the court to remand the case for a new decision if necessary.
12.2016.173 · ti (Art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Association Reinstatement Due to Flawed Dissolution Procedure
Applied to remit the case to the Commercial Register Office (URC) with instructions to proceed after revoking the dissolution decision.
52.2015.190 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Road Project Approval Overturned Due to Insufficient Noise Pollution Assessment
The decision was annulled and the case remitted to the State Council for a new decision after completing the investigation regarding acoustic aspects.
52.2014.450 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Appeal on Contaminated Site Cost Allocation Due to Violation of Right to be Heard
This article was cited to justify why the court would not remedy the procedural shortcomings of the lower instances.
12.2016.173 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Association Reinstatement Following Flawed Compulsory Dissolution Due to Unprocessed Address Change Request
Cited in the dispositive as the basis for remitting the case file to the Commercial Register Office.
52.2014.251 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Property Owner v. Municipality Regarding 2013 Drinking Water Usage Fee Structure
Cited regarding the possibility of remitting the case for further investigation if necessary.
52.2015.190 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Road Elevation and Widening Project Approval Challenged Over Noise Remediation Requirements
The Court remanded the case back to the State Council for a new decision after completing the investigation regarding the noise aspects of the project.
52.2015.51 · ti (art. 86 cpv. 2 LPAmm)
Consortium Road Regulation Competence Dispute
Used to order the referral of the case back to the Council of State for a new decision on the merits after annulling the contested resolution.