173.32 LJGLJC

CH-VD

Art. 10 LOI sur la juridiction constitutionnelle (LJC) - Contre des actes communaux [ 4 ]

Titre II, Chapitre II

Ouvrir la source officielle Texte complet (25 Articles) Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Art. 10 LJC · Contre des actes communaux [ 4 ]

1. A la qualité pour agir contre une règle de droit communal ou intercommunal, toute personne physique ou morale qui a un intérêt digne de protection à ce que l'acte attaqué soit annulé.

2. Ont également qualité pour former une requête

a. la municipalité ;

b. un dixième des membres du conseil communal, un cinquième des membres du conseil général, ou un groupe politique ;

c. le conseil exécutif d'une association de communes, d'une fédération de communes ou d'une agglomération ;

d. un dixième des membres du conseil intercommunal, ou un groupe politique ;

e. le Canton de Vaud, par le Conseil d'Etat.

3. Seules la municipalité, le conseil exécutif d'une association de communes ou une fraction de l'autorité législative, telle que définie aux lettres b et d ci-dessus peuvent recourir contre le refus d'approbation cantonal d'un règlement communal ou intercommunal. Seul le Conseil d'Etat peut recourir contre le refus d'une autorité communale de soumettre à approbation les règlements, arrêtés ou tarifs communaux et intercommunaux, contenant des règles de droit pour lesquels l'approbation cantonale est requise.

← Art. 9 LJC sur la juridiction constitutionnelle (LJC) - Objet Art. 11 LJC →

Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (17)

CCST.2018.0006 · vd (Art. 10 al. 2 LJC)

Municipal Parking Fee Modification Overruled Due to Tax Component

Used to confirm the applicants' standing to file the request as members of the Communal Council.

CCST.2015.0002 · vd (art. 10 al. 1 LJC)

Ride-Sharing Platform v. Intercommunal Taxi Service Regulation (Call Center Requirements)

Cited in the reasoning to establish the requirement for standing to appeal against a communal or intercommunal rule of law, leading to the partial rejection of the appeal.

CCST.2015.0003 · vd (Art. 10 al. 1 LJC)

Taxi Operators Challenge Intercommunal Service Regulation Amendments

Cited in the reasoning (which is heavily cited) regarding the standing to sue (qualité pour agir) but is not explicitly repeated in the final orders (Dispositif I, II, III).

CCST.2011.0008 · vd (art. 10 al. 1 LJC)

Challenge to Regional Fire and Rescue Association Statutes Upheld

This provision establishes the general requirement for a legally protected interest to have standing to challenge a communal act.

CCST.2011.0008 · vd (art. 10 al. 1 LJC)

Challenge to Regional Fire and Rescue Association Statutes Upheld

This provision establishes the general rule for standing in challenging communal acts.

CCST.2011.0008 · vd (art. 10 al. 1 LJC)

Challenge to Regional Fire and Rescue Association Statutes Upheld

This provision sets the general requirement for standing in challenging communal acts.

CCST.2011.0008 · vd (art. 10 al. 2 LJC)

Challenge to Regional Fire and Rescue Association Statutes Upheld

This provision was used to determine the standing of the municipalities in challenging the intercommunal act.

CCST.2011.0008 · vd (art. 10 al. 2 LJC)

Challenge to Regional Fire and Rescue Association Statutes Upheld

This provision was used to establish the standing of the applicant municipalities to challenge the act without demonstrating a protected interest.

CCST.2011.0008 · vd (art. 10 al. 2 LJC)

Challenge to Regional Fire and Rescue Association Statutes Upheld

This provision was used to recognize the standing of the municipalities to bring the request (recourse) against the intercommunal act without necessarily demonstrating a direct interest.

CCST.2011.0008 · vd (art. 10 al. 2 let. a LJC)

Challenge to Regional Fire and Rescue Association Statutes Upheld

This provision was cited in the reasoning to confirm that municipalities challenging an intercommunal act do not need to assert a direct protected interest.

CCST.2011.0008 · vd (art. 10 al. 2 let. a LJC)

Challenge to Regional Fire and Rescue Association Statutes Upheld

This provision was used to recognize the standing of the municipalities to bring the request (recourse) against the intercommunal act.

CCST.2011.0003 · vd (Art. 10 al. 1 LJC)

Property Owners Challenge Retroactive Wastewater Fee Application

Implied in the admissibility finding, as the parties were found to have the standing to sue under this article, although the article itself is not explicitly cited in the final orders.

CCST.2010.0003 · vd (art. 10 al. 1 LJC)

Municipal Police Regulations on Dangerous Animals Upheld Against Cantonal Law Challenge

The rejection of the appeal is based on the fact that the request was admissible, referencing the article governing who has standing to appeal.

CCST.2009.0006 · vd (art. 10 al. 1 LJC)

Waste Bylaw Annulment for Lack of Causal Principle Adherence

Cited in the reasoning when establishing the applicant's standing to sue, which is a prerequisite for admissibility (although the decision on the substance is the ground for inclusion here, procedural aspects related to admissibility are often cited alongside the main ground).

CCST.2007.0003 · vd (Art. 10 al. 1 LJC)

Taxi Operator Challenge to Municipal Taxi Regulations

Establishes the standing to challenge communal regulations.