Art. 64 LOG Legge sull’organizzazione giudiziaria (LOG)

32.2023.111 · ti (art. 64 LOG)

Disability Benefits Appeal Remanded for Further Medical Investigation

Mentioned in reasoning 2.1 as the basis for the single-judge decision, though the dispositive itself only cites cost/appeal provisions.

30.2021.20 · ti (Art. 64 LOG)

Social Security Offset Upheld Due to Failure to Contest Initial Decision

This article is not explicitly cited in the dispositive. (Note: Assuming the intent was to list procedural/cost articles cited in the dispositive, and since no cost/legal aid articles were explicitly ordered, this is excluded based on the strict rule.)

14.2017.109 · ti (art. 64 LOG)

Claimants v. Canton over Subsidy Shortfall Execution

The decision to waive procedural costs implies the application of procedural rules concerning costs, although the specific cost rule cited is Art. 66 al. 1 LTF for costs, which is not explicitly in the dispositive. Given the waiver, no cost article is explicitly cited in the operative part, only the outcome.

9.2014.173 · ti (art. 64 LOG)

Grandparent Visitation Supervision Dispute

Although not explicitly in the dispositive, the reasoning mentioned waiving court fees ('si rinuncia al prelievo di tasse e spese di giustizia'), which typically references the rule governing costs or fees, often found in procedural codes (like LOG or LTF articles for federal courts), but since the dispositive only contains a waiver without citing a specific article for the waiver itself, only the cited procedural/jurisdictional articles are included based on the strict rule.

16.1997.142 · ti (art. 64 LOG)

Former Employee v. Former Employer: Overtime Pay, Collective Agreement Burden of Proof, and Untaken Leave Entitlement

Cited in the reasoning for treating the second appeal as a cassation appeal, although this reference appears in the reasoning section (point 4) rather than the dispositive itself, it is included as the dispositive refers to the procedure based on these cited articles in the preamble. However, based strictly on the final numbered orders (I, II, III), no procedural articles from the CPC/LOG are explicitly repeated there.

13.2019.89 · ti (art. 64 LOG)

Appeal Inadmissible on Procedural Order Denying Witness Testimony

This provision (LOG) was cited in the context of the legal basis for appealing interlocutory procedural decisions to the Appeals Court.

31.2006.5 · ti (art. 64 LOG)

Social Fund v. Former Managing Partners: Liability for Unpaid Contributions Despite Claim of Due Diligence

Cited as the procedural basis for the single judge to decide the case since it involves a non-principle matter.

32.2005.116 · ti (Art. 64 LOG)

Pension Suppression Challenge Based on Disability Assessment Discrepancies

Although the dispositive does not explicitly cite Art. 64 LOG (which likely corresponds to the request for legal aid, as Art. 26c LOG was cited in the reasoning regarding the single judge composition), the order concerning costs (Art. 66 al. 1 LTF) and the specific reimbursement of costs to the insured (Art. 66 al. 1 LTF) implicitly relate to the procedural success and lack of costs for the winning party in this context. Given the explicit mention of costs/reimbursement below, Art. 64 LOG is excluded as it is not in the final orders, unlike the cost provisions.

32.2022.80 · ti (Art. 64 LOG)

Painter's Disability Appeal Regarding 18% Invalidity Degree Ruling

Cited regarding the composition of the Cantonal Court (in fatto section, if the decision had cited Art. 64 LTF/BGG, but the text cites Art. 49 cpv. 2 LOG, which is procedural for the court composition, not extracted as it is not in the dispositive. No equivalent provision is explicitly cited in the dispositive other than costs).

32.2023.1 · ti (Art. 64 LOG)

Architectural Draftsman v. Disability Insurance (DI) Benefits Denial

This article is implicitly referenced by the provision regarding judicial economy and allowing a single judge to decide, mentioned in the preamble to the legal considerations (2.1).

33.2014.1 · ti (Art. 64 LOG)

Assured vs. Compensation Fund: Denial of Justice Claim Regarding Retroactive Benefits

Cited in the reasoning as the legal basis allowing the decision to be made by a single judge.

34.2007.52 · ti (Art. 64 LOG)

Pension Asset Division Post-Divorce

This provision is implied by the decision to not charge a fee and to place the costs upon the State, which aligns with procedural rules concerning judicial costs when no specific cost article is cited in the operative part for taxation, often defaulting to State bearing in specific Cantonal contexts not explicitly detailed here, but covered under general cost disposition (though LOG is not the primary cost article in LTF context, in Cantonal decision structure, Art. 64 LOG likely governed the cost order when tax was not perceived).

34.2007.56 · ti (art. 64 LOG)

Cantonal Insurance Tribunal Pension Wealth Division Case

Although the decision is from a Cantonal Court (Tribunale cantonale delle assicurazioni), the court cited Art. 49 para. 2 LOG in the reasoning, which relates to the composition of the court, but the dispositive orders do not explicitly cite grounds for appeal or costs based on procedural articles pertaining to *this* specific court's final decision structure regarding the Federal Tribunal appeal path, other than the notification of appeal rights.

34.2013.50 · ti (art. 64 LOG)

Cantonal Court Declines Pension Division Due to Prior Lawful Withdrawal

This reference appears in the reasoning (point 2.1): 'Il TCA può dunque decidere nella composizione di un giudice unico ai sensi dell'art. 49 cpv. 2 LOG' - I will check the final disposition. Since I cannot find the operative dispositive section for costs, I will look at article 3 of the disposition.

34.2024.3 · ti (art. 64 LOG)

Provident Fund v. Employer: Unpaid Occupational Benefit Contributions and Debt Enforcement

Cited in the section discussing the composition of the tribunal (a single judge) based on the procedural rules.