173.8 GTARLTAR

CH-VS

Art. 29 Loi fixant le tarif des frais et dépens devant les autorités judiciaires ou administratives (LTar) - Honoraires du conseil juridique - Cas spéciaux

Dépens - Généralités

Ouvrir la source officielle Texte complet (47 Articles) Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Art. 29 LTar · Cas spéciaux

1. Dans les causes qui ont nécessité un travail particulier, notamment lorsque le mandat a dû être exécuté en partie en dehors des heures de travail, que les moyens de preuve ont été longs et difficiles à réunir ou coordonner, que le dossier de la procédure probatoire a pris une ampleur considérable, que les questions de fait ou de droit ont été spécialement compliquées, que le conseil juridique représente plusieurs parties ou que son client est opposé à plusieurs parties, l'autorité peut accorder des honoraires d'un montant supérieur à celui prévu par le tarif.

2. Lorsqu'il y a une disproportion manifeste entre la valeur litigieuse et l'intérêt des parties au procès ou entre la rémunération due d'après le présent tarif et le travail effectif du conseil juridique, l'autorité peut ramener les honoraires au-dessous du minimum prévu.

3. En cas de désistement, de retrait du recours, de jugement par défaut, de transaction, d'irrecevabilité et, d'une manière générale, lorsque la cause ne se termine pas par un jugement au fond, les honoraires peuvent être réduits en conséquence.

← Art. 28 LTar Loi fixant le tarif des frais et dépens devant les autorités judiciaires ou administratives (LTar) - Champ d'application Art. 30 LTar →

Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (97)

TCVS C1 16 238 · vs (Art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Insurer Reimbursement Claim in Plane Crash Case Rejected Despite Overcoming Prescription Period

Used to determine the amount of costs awarded to the successful party for the appeal procedure.

C1 25 101 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Cantonal Court Decision on Costs and Legal Fees After Federal Tribunal Ruling

Cited in determining the amount of legal fees for the first instance and appeal proceedings.

C1 25 104 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 1 und 2 GTar)

Father v. Child Protection Authority on Visitation and Procedural Delays

Cited regarding the possibility of increasing or decreasing the standard rates based on the lawyer's effort.

C1 25 53 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Remand of Cantonal Decision on Liquidator Removal Appeal Costs Apportionment

Cited in the reasoning regarding the reduction of legal fees for the subsequent procedure, which is reflected in the final amount awarded.

A1 24 19 · vs (art. 4, 29 al. 2 et 39 LTar)

Historic Property Demolition and Construction Authorization Challenge

Cited as the basis for calculating and imposing costs (attorney fees) on the appellants.

C1 24 38 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 GTar)

Withdrawal of Foreign Custody Enforcement and Denial of Legal Aid

Cited as a basis for reducing the fee when the case does not end with a merits decision (e.g., withdrawal).

C1 22 226 · vs (art. 27, 29 al. 2, 32 al. 1 et 35 al. 1 let. a LTar)

Traffic Accident Claim Timeliness Despite Prescription Claim

Cited in the reasoning for determining the amount of the attorney fees awarded to the appellee based on the tariff law.

C1 23 121 · vs (art. 29 al. 1 LTar)

Loan Repayment vs. Breach of Confidentiality Counterclaim

Cited as the basis for partially admitting the joint appeal and increasing the professional fees (dépens) awarded to the respondent for the first instance proceedings.

F1 24 138 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 et 39 LTar)

Taxpayer v. Cantonal Corporate Tax Commission (Timeliness of Corporate Tax Objection)

Cited in the reasoning (5.2) as part of the justification for setting the indemnity amount.

P1 24 69 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 3 GTar)

Cantonal Court Dismisses Defamation Appeal Due to Improper Submission

Applied to justify the proportional reduction of the court fee because the procedure ended at an early stage.

F1 24 105 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 et 39 LTar)

Cantonal Court Grants Lump-Sum Deduction for Privately Rented Box-Garages Following Federal Tribunal Annulment

Cited in the dispositive as part of the basis (LTar) for awarding costs to the appellant.

C1 22 61 · vs (Art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Employee Termination, Non-Compete Breach, and Penalty Reduction

Cited in the final order as a criterion for setting the appeal expenses.

P1 23 107 · vs (Art. 29 Abs. 1 GTar)

Appeal Regarding Conviction, Sentence, and Damages in Attempted Rape and Drug Case

Used in the reasoning to assess whether the case warranted an exceptional fee for the defense counsel (Patrick Ruppen) in the first instance.

A1 23 67 · vs (art. 29 al. 2 LTar)

Notary Sanctioned for Breach of Professional Secrecy in Divorce Proceedings

Cited in the final order (8.3) when assessing the amount of legal costs awarded.

C1 23 55 · vs (art. 29 al. 2, 32 al. 1 et 35 al. 1 let. a LTar)

Appellant v. Company Regarding Unjustified Dismissal and Procedural Deficiencies

Cited in the reasoning to determine the amount of the appeal costs awarded.