{"Signatur": "CH_BGE_005", "Spider": "CH_BGE", "Sprache": "de", "Datum": "2008-04-10", "HTML": {"Datei": "CH_BGE/CH_BGE_005_BGE-134-III-520_2008-04-10.html", "URL": "https://search.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/de/php/clir/http/index.php?lang=de&type=highlight_simple_query&page=20&from_date=&to_date=&from_year=2008&to_year=2008&sort=relevance&insertion_date=&from_date_push=&top_subcollection_clir=bge&query_words=&part=all&de_fr=&de_it=&fr_de=&fr_it=&it_de=&it_fr=&orig=&translation=&rank=195&highlight_docid=atf%3A%2F%2F134-III-520%3Ade&number_of_ranks=277&azaclir=clir", "Checksum": "a248733f9529b866cbc83d0ed8e0ac16"}, "Scrapedate": "2025-06-16", "Num": ["BGE 134 III 520", "5D_139/2007"], "Kopfzeile": [{"Sprachen": ["de"], "Text": "Bundesgericht (BGE) Band III 10.04.2008 BGE 134 III 520 (5D_139/2007)"}, {"Sprachen": ["fr"], "Text": "Tribunal f\u00e9d\u00e9ral (ATF) Volume III 10.04.2008 BGE 134 III 520 (5D_139/2007)"}, {"Sprachen": ["it"], "Text": "Tribunale federale (DTF) Volume III 10.04.2008 BGE 134 III 520 (5D_139/2007)"}], "Meta": [{"Sprachen": ["de"], "Text": "Eidgenossenschaft Bundesgericht (BGE) Band III"}, {"Sprachen": ["fr"], "Text": "Conf\u00e9deration Tribunal f\u00e9d\u00e9ral (ATF) Volume III"}, {"Sprachen": ["it"], "Text": "Confederazione Tribunale federale (DTF) Volume III"}, {"Sprachen": ["de", "fr", "it"], "Text": "II. zivilrechtlichen Abteilung"}], "Abstract": [{"Sprachen": ["de"], "Text": "Regeste\n<br>Definitive Rechts\u00f6ffnung; subsidi\u00e4re Verfassungsbeschwerde; Anwaltsmonopol; Art. 40 Abs. 1, Art. 72 Abs. 1 und 2 lit. a BGG. Das Anwaltsmonopol gilt im Anwendungsbereich der subsidi\u00e4ren Verfassungsbeschwerde in Zivil- und Strafsachen, dagegen nicht in \u00f6ffentlich-rechtlichen Angelegenheiten (E. 1.2). Da nach neuem Recht die SchKG-Angelegenheiten nach Art. 72 Abs. 2 lit. a BGG der Beschwerde in Zivilsachen zugewiesen werden, gilt f\u00fcr sie auch das Anwaltsmonopol gem\u00e4ss Art. 40 Abs. 1 BGG (E. 1.5)."}, {"Sprachen": ["fr"], "Text": "Regeste\n<br>Mainlev\u00e9e d\u00e9finitive; recours constitutionnel subsidiaire; monopole de l'avocat; art. 40 al. 1, art. 72 al. 1 et 2 let. a LTF. Le monopole de l'avocat s'applique dans les recours constitutionnels subsidiaires en mati\u00e8re civile et p\u00e9nale, en revanche pas en mati\u00e8re de droit public (consid. 1.2). Etant donn\u00e9 que, selon le nouveau droit, les d\u00e9cisions en mati\u00e8re de poursuite pour dettes et de faillite selon l'art. 72 al. 2 let. a LTF rel\u00e8vent du recours en mati\u00e8re civile, le monopole de l'avocat s'applique aussi pour ces d\u00e9cisions, conform\u00e9ment \u00e0 l'art. 40 al. 1 LTF (consid. 1.5)."}, {"Sprachen": ["it"], "Text": "Regesto\n<br>Rigetto definitivo dell'opposizione; ricorso sussidiario in materia costituzionale; monopolio dell'avvocato; art. 40 cpv. 1, art. 72 cpv. 1 e 2 lett. a LTF. Il monopolio dell'avvocato vige nel campo di applicazione del ricorso sussidiario in materia costituzionale per le cause civili e penali, ma non per quelle di diritto pubblico (consid. 1.2). Poich\u00e9 secondo il nuovo diritto le cause in materia di esecuzione e fallimento ai sensi dell'art. 72 cpv. 2 lett. a LTF soggiacciono al ricorso in materia civile, vige anche per loro il monopolio dell'avvocato ai sensi dell'art. 40 cpv. 1 LTF (consid. 1.5)."}], "ScrapyJob": "446973/47/2482", "Zeit UTC": "16.06.2025 05:17:45", "Checksum": "cad0e54a3b0a487a819be0c126ac5284"}