Document ID: /roh_data/filtered/swiss_laws_in_ROHinterleaved.jsonl.gz/32991

This text was translated from EN into Rumantsch Grischun.

The appellate authority shall review their decision ex officio or on the application of a party if the decision has been influenced by a felony or misdemeanour. It shall also review its decision on the application of a party if:a. the party introduces relevant new facts or evidence;b. the party demonstrates that the appellate authority overlooked relevant facts that were on record or specific applications;c. the party demonstrates that the appellate authority violated the provisions of Articles 10, 59 or 76 on recusal, Articles 26–28 on the inspection of files or the Articles 29–33 on the right to be heard; ord. the European Court of Human Rights has held in a final judgment that there has been a violation of the Convention of 4 November 1950 for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) or of the protocols thereto, or if the case has been concluded by means of a friendly settlement (Art. 39 ECHR), provided an award of damages is not sufficient to remedy the consequences of the violation and the review is necessary in ruling to redress the violation. The grounds referred to in paragraph 2 letters a–c are not regarded as grounds for a review if the party had the opportunity to invoke them in the course of proceedings prior to the appeal decision, or by means of an appeal that he was entitled to bring against the appeal decision. Amended by Annex No 10 of the Federal Administrative Court Act of 17 June 2005, in force since 1 Jan. 2007 (AS 2006 2197 1069; BBl 2001 4202). Amended by Annex No 1 of the FA of 1 Oct. 2021, in force since 1 July 2022  (AS 2022 289; BBl 2021 300, 889). SR 0.101

L’instanza da recurs proceda d’uffizi u sin dumonda d’ina partida a la revisiun da sia decisiun, sche quella è vegnida influenzada d’in crim u d’in delict. Ultra da quai proceda ella a la revisiun sin dumonda d’ina partida, sche:a. la partida preschenta novs fatgs relevants u meds da cumprova;b. la partida cumprova che l’instanza da recurs ha survesì fatgs relevants u tschertas pretensiuns che las actas cuntegnan;c. la partida cumprova che l’instanza da recurs ha violà las disposiziuns dals artitgels 10, 59 u 76 davart la recusaziun, dals artitgels 26–28 davart l’invista da las actas u dals artitgels 29–33 davart l’attenziun giuridica; ud. il Tribunal europeic dals dretgs umans ha constatà en ina sentenzia definitiva che la Convenziun dals 4 da november 1950 per la protecziun dals dretgs umans e da las libertads fundamentalas (CEDU) u ses protocols sajan vegnids violads, u ha terminà il cas tras ina cunvegna amicabla (art. 39 CEDU), uschenavant ch’ina indemnisaziun n’è betg adattada per gulivar las consequenzas da la violaziun e la revisiun è necessaria per eliminar la violaziun. Ils motivs en il senn da l’alinea 2 literas a–c na valan betg sco motivs da revisiun, sche la partida als ha pudì far valair en il rom da la procedura, che ha precedì la decisiun da recurs, u sin la via d’in recurs, il qual ella ha pudì far cun dretg cunter questa decisiun da recurs. Versiun tenor la cifra 10 da l’agiunta da la LF dals 17 da zer. 2005 davart il TAF, en vigur dapi il 1. da schan. 2007 (AS 2006 2197 1069; BBl 2001 4202). Versiun tenor la cifra 1 da l’agiunta da la LF dal 1. d’oct. 2021, en vigur dapi il 1. da fan. 2022 (AS 2022 289; BBl 2021 300, 889). SR 0.101