The Stadelhofen is the court case?

Stadelhofen, The extension of the station of Santiago Calatrava carried out. The Spanish-Swiss star architect and his Zurich office have already called after the publication of the project competition, the Federal administrative court. The competition requirements of the SBB had "an inevitably disfiguring character" to the existing building. Calatrava's "non-delegable and indispensable moral rights" would be violated.

This complaint was later withdrawn, but his attorney announced that the project to an alternative team would be carefully tested, should get the star architect of the contract. If such a project would intervene extensively in the existing construction, "would violate the copyright law." Whether it comes now, after the competition, the decision to a court procedure, is open. Both the office for his as well as the lawyer, Felix Hollinger, would not comment yesterday, Tuesday (read here how the Stadelhofen train station will be converted).

Stadelhofen is a listed historical monument

As it stands the Argument with the copyright? Is that this also applies to real estate, if it is so-called to works of architecture. The Stadelhofen station is already today under monument protection stands up, speaks for a work of architecture. A work is worthy of according to Federal court protection if it "bears the stamp of the personality of its author, unmistakably characteristic features and of representations of the same plant genus clearly differs".

has Been with the station Stadelhofen famous architect Santiago Calatrava. Image: Esther Michel

The copyright but it also says: "Out of works of the architecture may be changed by the owner." Especially in the case of works that have been created for a particular use purpose, you must know the author, according to the Federal court but that "the building is designed to be permanent and, therefore, determined to meet any revised or expanded needs of the owner, which can be set during the period of use".

what works

left The copyright of the owners but limits. Because the author of the work may be "any distortion of the work oppose, the one who hurt him in the personality". To do this, it must be according to the Federal court but a "gross distortion", "a mutilation of emerging change, a drastic violation of the personality of the author".

the question had to be dealt with by the highest court of the country in connection with the Expansion of the ETH Zurich on the hönggerberg to. Architect Albert H. Steiner, in the years 1964 to 1973 the 1. Stage had realized, complained, the first two phases of the 3. Expansion stage injured his copyright. The Federal court could not confirm Steiner's view that the project is "Elementary" mutilate his own work in such a manner and position that his honour was seriously injured.

Created: 20.11.2019, 08:52 PM