The Swiss Federal Supreme Court confirms the dismissal of indemnification claims against 14 former executives of SAirGroup

On 26 April 2013, Swissair (in liquidation) filed a claim with the Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich on the basis of Article 754 of the Swiss Code of Obligations against 14 former executives for compensation for damages totalling the equivalent of CHF 178,511,561.13, which it had suffered due to the loss of its cash pool claims against Finance BV.

The Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the claim in its judgment of 16 March 2018. It ordered the plaintiff to pay the court fee of CHF 3,000,000. In addition, the plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendants each a compensation of between CHF 700,000 and CHF 100,000.

On 8 May 2018, Swissair (in liquidation) lodged an appeal against this ruling with the Swiss Federal Supreme Court in civil matters which dismissed plaintiff’s main claim in its ruling of 18 November 2019.

Like the Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court ruled that the 14 former SAirGroup executives were not in breach of their duties in the management of Swissair’s assets and, furthermore, additional legal requirements for indemnification had not been met.


Urteil des Schweizerischen Bundesgerichts (I. zivilrechtliche Abteilung) vom November 18. November 2019 (4A_268/2018)

HIV prevention campaign "LOVE LIFE – no regrets": the Swiss Federal Supreme Court rejected a complaint of 35 children and young people represented by their parents

In its judgement of June 15, 2018 (2C_601/2016), the Swiss Federal Supreme Court ruled that the HIV prevention campaign “LOVE LIFE – no regrets” of the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) is deemded to be a so-called “real act” of an authority. According to the Federal Act on Administrative Procedure (APA), judicial review may only be sought if and when a real act of an administrative body affects rights and obligations of citizens. In the present case, this was denied by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court with convincing reasons.

 

 

1234