Jugement Kantonsgericht (VD - Jug/2020/94)

Canton:	VD
Case number:	Jug/2020/94

Instance:	Kantonsgericht
Department:	Cour d'appel pénale

Kantonsgericht Entscheid Jug/2020/94 vom 02.03.2020 (VD)

Date:	02.03.2020
Force of law:	-

Summary:	The owners of a building (A.B._______, B.B._______ and C.B._______) appealed against a decision of the Court of First Instance, which allowed the company E.________ Sàrl to register a legal craftsman mortgage on their property. The owners argued that the company did not prove that it actually carried out work and that the subcontractor paid the bill. However, the Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the company and upheld the original decision. The court found that the company had provided sufficient evidence of the work performed, and the documents that were supposed to prove the payment by the subcontractor were considered not credible. The appeal of the owners was rejected, and they had to bear the court costs of the appeal proceedings.
Rule of Law:	Art. 10 CPP;Art. 100 LTF;Art. 389 CPP;Art. 398 CPP;Art. 428 CPP;Art. 9 CPP;
BGE reference::	-
Comment:	Schweizer, Eugster, Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Strafprozessordnung, Art. 398 StPO, 2014 Spühler, Basler Kommentar zur ZPO, Art. 321 ZPO ; Art. 311 ZPO, 2017

Please note that there is no claim to topicality/accuracy/format and/or completeness and that therefore any guarantee is excluded. Original decisions may be ordered or made on the basis of the competent court.

Click here to return to the page search engine.