Art. 128 : Gesetz über die Gerichts und Behördenorganisation im Zivil und Strafprozess (GOG)

RU210115 · zh (§ 128 GOG)

Appeal Regarding Compensation for Counsel in Child Support Conciliation Phase

Cited by the appellant as allegedly violated by the lower court concerning the obligation of the municipality to pay the fees for legal aid.

RU190063 · zh (§ 128 GOG)

State Liability Compensation and Legal Aid in Preliminary Administrative Procedure

This provision, relating to the jurisdiction for granting free legal aid, was explicitly ruled as inapplicable to the state liability preliminary procedure.

VO130180 · zh (§ 128 GOG)

Legal Aid Denied for Insufficient Financial Disclosure in Maintenance Claim

Grants the Obergerichtspräsident jurisdiction for free legal aid applications before the litigation phase.

VO130171 · zh (§ 128 GOG)

Court Denies Legal Aid for Conciliation Due to Applicant's Financial Capacity

Cited as the legal basis for the President of the High Court's jurisdiction in summary proceedings for applications for legal aid before a lawsuit is filed.

RB110043 · zh (§ 128 GOG)

Appeal Dismissed: Denial of Free Legal Aid in Debt Collection and Unjust Enrichment Case

Cited in the reasoning (Erwägung 6b) to establish the competent authority for filing a request for legal aid before filing the claim.

VO110101 · zh (§ 128 GOG e contrario)

Jurisdiction over Post-Filing Legal Aid Petitions

Applied to decline jurisdiction over the request for legal aid as the case was already filed with the District Court.

VO110069 · zh (§ 128 GOG)

Child Support Legal Aid Granted for Minor

This provision designates the Obergerichtspräsident as competent for decisions regarding legal aid before the filing of a lawsuit in summary proceedings, as referenced in the reasoning and implicitly applied by the court's consideration of the case.

VO110101 · zh (§ 128 GOG e contrario)

Jurisdictional Dispute Over Legal Aid Application Timing

The president ruled not to enter into the merits of the application for legal aid because, by application of this provision (contrario), the High Court President is no longer competent after the claim has been filed with the court.