281.1 EGSCHKGLALP

CH-VS

Art. 6 Loi d'application de la loi fédérale sur la poursuite pour dettes et la faillite (LALP) - Locaux

Organisation - Généralités

Ouvrir la source officielle Texte complet (38 Articles) Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Art. 6 LALP · Locaux

1. La fourniture et l'ameublement des locaux nécessaires aux offices sont supportés par le compte d'exploitation.

2. Au besoin, la commune du siège met à disposition d'un office les locaux nécessaires à son activité. Le loyer et les charges sont supportés par le compte d'exploitation de l'office.

3. Les bureaux des offices doivent être ouverts au public tous les jours ouvrables sauf le samedi et les jours tombant entre deux jours fériés, selon un horaire prescrit par le Conseil d'Etat. Ce dernier peut, dans des cas particuliers, accorder des dérogations qui seront publiées dans le Bulletin officiel.

4. Pendant les féries, les bureaux sont ouverts au minimum deux demi-journées par semaine. Le Conseil d'Etat arrête les modalités.

← Art. 5 LALP Loi d'application de la loi fédérale sur la poursuite pour dettes et la faillite (LALP) - Principes Art. 7 LALP →

Décisions judiciaires appliquant cette disposition (13)

A/4487/2018 · ge (art. 6 al. 1 de la loi d'application de la LP du 29 janvier 2010 - LaLP - E 3 60))

Taxpayers Appeal Rejection of Tax Element Allocation and Enforcement Suspension

Cited in the reasoning section (Considerant 3) to identify the supervisory authority in Geneva, but not explicitly in the dispositive.

KSK 2018 50 · gr (Art. 6 cpv. 1 LEF)

Appeal Dismissed for Time-Barred Execution Challenge and Destroyed Records

Basis for concluding that the claim related to the execution of the pledges was subject to absolute prescription (statute of limitations).

HC.2017.1145 · vd (Art. 6 al. 1 LP)

Appellant v. State: Prescription Period for Damages Against Public Official

This provision establishes the prescriptive period for the claim for damages, which was the primary basis for rejecting the appeal (as the claim was deemed prescribed).

C/27986/2012 · ge (art. 6 al. 1 LP)

State v. Creditors Regarding Bankruptcy Office Malfeasance

Cited in the reasoning section to discuss the one-year relative limitation period for the liability claim, which was determined not to have elapsed.

CDP.2012.381 · ne (Art. 6 al. 1 LP)

Bankruptcy Annulment and Liability for Restaurant Closure Damages

Cited as the relevant prescriptive period for the damages action, which the court finds was respected.

AA040054 · zh (Art. 6 Abs. 1 SchKG)

Appellant v. Cantonal Organs Regarding Security Deposit and Legal Aid Denial

Discussed extensively in relation to the appellant's substantive claims (statute of limitations), which contributed to the assessment of the appeal's hopelessness.

12.2002.84 · ti (Art. 6 LEF)

Claim for Damages Against Canton Due to Administrator's Erroneous Property Encumbrance Listing Leading to Auction Nullification

Cited in the analysis regarding the prescription period, although the procedural notification under Art. 20 LFResp (analogous to Art. 5 LEF liability context) was found to be timely.

12.2001.51 · ti (art. 6 cpv. 1 LEF)

Bankruptcy Commissioner Negligence Suit Barred by Prescription

This provision establishes the one-year prescription period from the date of knowledge of the damage, which was the basis for rejecting the appeal against the finding of prescription.

TA.1999.203 · ne (art. 6 LP)

Creditor's Claim Against State for Vandalism Damages Barred by Untimely Filing

While the court found the action prescribed based on this article in the reasoning, it is not explicitly cited in the dispositive orders (which only declare inadmissibility and rule on costs).

12.2001.51 · ti (art. 6 cpv. 1 LEF)

Company v. Public Entity (Prescription of Claim Against Composition Commissioner)

This article established the one-year statute of limitations period that the Court used to reject the appeal.

12.2002.84 · ti (art. 6 LEF)

State Liability for Bankruptcy Administrator's Error in Encumbrance List and Statute of Limitations

This provision concerning the statute of limitations was applied to confirm that the lawsuit was timely, as the notification of damage was sent within the one-year period.

AA040054 · zh (Art. 6 Abs. 1 SchKG)

Claimant v. Canton Regarding Damages for Alleged Official Misconduct in Bankruptcy Proceedings

The Court implicitly reviewed the application of this provision concerning the statute of limitations when determining the lack of prospects of success for the appeal.

PS200234 · zh (Art. 6 Abs. 3 und 4 SchKG)

Debtor Reverses Bankruptcy Order by Depositing Contested Debt and Demonstrating Solvency

This reference appears to be a typo in the original text (it references Art. 67 Abs. 3 und 4 SchKG). Assuming the intent was to reference the cited article in the reasoning regarding the examination of claims.