101.01
KV-VDCST-VD
CH-VD
CH-VD
Art. 17 CONSTITUTION du Canton de Vaud (Cst-VD) - Libertés d'opinion et d'information
Titre II
Art. 17 Cst-VD · Libertés d'opinion et d'information
1. Les libertés d'opinion et d'information sont garanties.
2. Elles comprennent
a. le droit de former, d'exprimer et de répandre librement son opinion, comme de s'en abstenir;
b. le droit de recevoir librement des informations, de se les procurer aux sources généralement accessibles et de les diffuser;
c. le droit de consulter les documents officiels, dans la mesure où aucun intérêt prépondérant, public ou privé, ne s'y oppose.
Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (13)
AC.2022.0360 · vd (art. 17 al. 2 de la Constitution du canton de Vaud du 14 avril 2003 (Cst-VD))
Property Owner v. Municipality Regarding Building Permit Annulment for Insufficient Reasoning
The annulment of the decision was based on the violation of the right to be heard, derived from this constitutional right, as detailed in the reasoning.
AC.2021.0280 · vd (Art. 17 al. 2 de la Constitution du canton de Vaud du 14 avril 2003 (Cst-VD; BLV 101.01))
Municipal Building Permit Appeal Regarding Window Modifications
Cited as the basis for the right to be heard.
FI.2018.0224 · vd (art. 17 al. 2 Cst-VD)
Drainage Fee Challenge Based on Impervious Surface Calculation and Public Connection
Cited in the reasoning regarding the right to be heard, although the court ultimately found this claim to have been remedied in the appeal procedure.
AC.2016.0373 · vd (Art. 17 al. 2 Cst-VD)
Appeal on Building Permit Refusal and Municipal Order to Resume Work
This article, concerning the right to be heard, was examined alongside Art. 29 al. 2 Cst. in relation to the motivation of the decision, but the claim was rejected.
AC.2016.0385 · vd (art. 17 al. 2 de la Constitution du canton de Vaud du 14 avril 2003 (Cst-VD; RSV 101.01))
Annulment of Building Permit Approval Due to Unreasoned Decision on Heritage Concerns
Cited in the reasoning (Considerant 1.a) regarding the right to be heard, which is the ground for allowing the appeal (Order I) and annulling the contested decision (Order II).
AC.2015.0111 · vd (Art. 17 al. 2 Cst-VD)
Appeal Against Building Permit Annulled Due to Architectural Incompatibility with Protected Neighborhood Aesthetic
Cited as the cantonal constitutional basis for the right to be heard.
AC.2015.0197 · vd (Art. 17 al. 2 de la Constitution du canton de Vaud du 14 avril 2003 (Cst-VD; RSV 101.01))
Appeal Against Building Permit for Non-Conforming Construction Outside Building Zone
Canton Vaud constitutional right to be heard, invoked by the appellant concerning procedural rights.
PS.2015.0055 · vd (art. 17 al. 2 Cst-VD)
Social Assistance Termination Upheld Due to Income Misrepresentation
Cited alongside federal constitutional rights regarding the right to be heard, which influenced the decision on evidence procedure.
PE.2015.0206 · vd (art. 17 al. 2 Cst-VD)
Kosovar National v. Denial of Residence Permit and Removal Order
This Cantonal constitutional article regarding the right to be heard was cited in the context of considering the procedural request for an evidentiary hearing.
PE.2014.0360 · vd (art. 17 al. 2 Cst-VD)
Appeal Regarding Refusal to Extend Residence Permit for MENA Consulting Venture
Cited alongside Art. 29 al. 2 Cst. regarding the right to be heard, which justified the admission of the appeal and the annulment of the decision.
PE.2014.0260 · vd (art. 17 al. 2 Cst-VD)
Foreign National Deportation Upheld Due to Repeated Serious Traffic Offenses
Cited in the reasoning regarding the right to be heard, which was ultimately found not violated.
PE.2014.0176 · vd (art. 17 al. 2 Cst-VD)
Family Reunification Permit Refusal Upheld Due to Untimely Application and Lack of Major Family Reasons
This cantonal constitutional right to be heard was cited in the context of the appellants' claim regarding motivation, but the court rejected the claim.
PE.2010.0398 · vd (Art. 17 al. 2 Cst-VD)
Deportation of Former Asylum Seeker Upheld Despite Medical Condition and Integration
Cited in the context of the right to be heard, though the main ground for rejection was substantive.