Art. 61 RDSt Regolamento dei dipendenti dello Stato (RDSt)

31.2023.7 · ti (Art. 61 LTF)

Revision of Social Security Liability Denied Due to Prior Final Judgment

Cited in relation to the finality of the Federal Supreme Court's judgment, which determines the authority competent to review the matter.

35.2018.46 · ti (Art. 61 lett. b. e c. sgg. LTF)

Insurer Liability for Accident-Induced Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS)

The court uses these articles for the decision on legal costs and compensation of the insured.

14.2019.181 · ti (art. 61 cpv. 1 LTF)

Debtor's Appeal Granted Annulment of Bankruptcy Due to Pre-existing Payment Agreement

Not explicitly cited in the dispositive; this reference appears in the omitted section regarding legal remedies against the Federal Tribunal decision, not the actual orders.

30.2013.36 · ti (Art. 61 LTF)

Social Security Contribution Assessment Timeliness and Tax Ruling Application

Cited in the reasoning to establish when Federal Supreme Court rulings become final, affecting the prescription calculation.

35.2008.56 · ti (Art. 61 cpv. 2 LTF)

Agricultural Worker's Appeal for Disability Pension Denied Over Residual Capacity and Salary Data Dispute

Cited in the final order for imposing costs (though the specific provision cited for costs in the dispositive is Art. 66 al. 1 LTF, this article is implied by the reference to the procedure in the context of the appeal).

52.2008.57 · ti (art. 61 LTF)

Heirs v. Municipality Regarding Stable Reconstruction Denial

Cited as the procedural basis for appealing to the Federal Supreme Court (Recours en matière de droit public).

52.2002.175 · ti (art. 61 al. 1 LTF)

Construction Firm v. Municipality over Contract Award Procedure

Although the provision refers to LTF (Federal Tribunal Law), the context suggests a reference to cantonal procedural law (PAmm). Assuming this is an error in the text and corresponds to a cost provision in the cantonal law, it is included as it appears in the final enumeration before the orders.

32.2001.36 · ti (Art. 61 cpv. 2 LTF)

Disability Benefits Appeal Remanded for Further Factual Development Regarding Work Capacity

Cited in the dispositive regarding the costs, specifically that no court fee is collected.

52.1998.246 · ti (art. 61 LTF)

Appeal Against Building Permit Dismissed for Lack of Standing

Cited in the final orders section, this provision concerns the allocation of judicial costs.

52.1994.26 · ti (art. 61 LTF)

Appeal Against Building Permit Condition Upheld Due to Denial of Justice on Substantive Building Law Challenges

Cited in the dispositive orders to determine the liability for costs (though the text uses PAmm articles, the cost provision itself is explicitly listed in the concluding section).

11.2017.10 · ti (Art. 61 Costi LTF)

Artisan Collective Hypothec Registration Dispute and Moot Appeal Costs Assessment

Cited in the reasoning concerning the application of federal appeal deadlines.

14.2006.65 · ti (art. 61 cpv. 1 LTF)

Spousal Support Enforcement Opposition Removal Denied Lack of Executory Title

Although the text explicitly mentions 'art. 61 cpv. 1 OTLEF' as a basis for the ruling, the final disposition point 2 only deals with costs, which are typically regulated by the LTF in Federal Tribunal decisions. However, since the provided text is an appellate court decision and explicitly mentions 'OTLEF' in the citing list, I will prioritize the provision listed in the citing section that governs costs, which is usually Art. 68/69 LTF or corresponding cantonal rules. Given that the dispositive only mentions costs being charged to the appellant, and a cantonal rule is cited in the preamble, I will rely strictly on the cited articles. Since no explicit cost article from the LTF is cited in the dispositive, and the provincial rules (OTLEF) are cited as the basis for the ruling, I must include the cited OTLEF articles.

15.2014.125 · ti (art. 61 LTF)

Enforcement Against Joint Estate Share Exceeding Debt Value

This reference appears to be a typo in the original text's numbering; point 5 refers to OTLEF, and point 3 refers to costs exclusion. Assuming point 3 refers specifically to the cost ruling based on the content of point 5, and based on required format which strictly follows textual citation in dispositive, this specific article 'art. 61 LTF' is *not* explicitly cited in the dispositive points 1-4. However, point 3 of the dispositive states 'Non si prelevano spese né si assegnano indennità', which corresponds to the preceding considerations 5 that cites 'art. 61 cpv. 2 lett. a e 62 cpv. 2 OTLEF'. If the intent was to cite the LTF for costs, I must strictly follow the text. Since dispositive point 3 simply states the result, and the reasoning point 5 points to OTLEF, I will only include the explicitly cited OTLEF provisions from the reasoning that were followed by the dispositive.

15.2016.100 · ti (art. 61 cpv. 2 lett. a LTF)

Supervisory Body Upholds Inclusion of Housing Installment Payments in Subsistence Minimum Calculation for Seizure Proceedings

Cited in the appeal remedies section regarding the possibility of recourse to the Federal Tribunal.

15.2016.100 · ti (art. 61 cpv. 2 lett. a LTF)

Supervisory Body Upholds Inclusion of Housing Installment Payments in Subsistence Minimum Calculation for Seizure Proceedings

Cited in the final order (point 2) stating that no compensation is awarded.