At its meeting on October 14, 2020, the Federal Council decided not to extend the temporary measures to prevent corona-related bankruptcies. The measures of the Covid-19 Ordinance on Insolvency Law of April 16, 2020 were limited to six months and continue to apply until October 19, 2020. For legal entities and their responsible persons that are subject to a legal obligation to notify in the event of capital loss and over-indebtedness, this also means a return to the regular legal obligations to notify in the event of capital loss and over-indebtedness.
With this decision, the Federal Supreme Court clarified the question whether an unsuccessful proceeding for setting aside the objection also justifies the non-disclosure of debt collection to third parties based on Art. 8 para. 3 lit. d of the Swiss Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Act. The Federal Supreme Court denies this. Even after an unsuccessful application for the objection to be set aside, the debt enforcement request would still be disclosed to third parties. If the (alleged) debtor nevertheless wishes to prevent disclosure of the debt collection to third parties, he can and must take action himself and bring an action against the (alleged) creditor for cancellation of the debt collection request or demonstration of non-existence of the claim.
In these extraordinary COVID-19 times, many people are forced to deal with illness or even death. Accordingly, precaution seems more important than ever and the question of what happens or should happen to one's assets in the event of death is omnipresent. Certain legal precautions can be taken in such cases to safeguard one's will as comprehensively as possible. The following article provides an overview of the legal possibilities.
Legal entities and partnerships ceasing their business activities should be formally liquidated sooner or later. The required proceedings and tax consequences in Switzerland are summarised in this newsletter.
In the case of a self-employed mother the Swiss Federal Supreme Court rejects an operating allowance similar to the one paid to women and men in service. This unequal treatment is due to physical differences between men and women and is therefore not discriminating. In the opinion of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, the legislator must take action and enact the legal basis to pay an operating allowance to self-employed mothers as well.
In an officially published decision, the Federal Supreme Court has confirmed that the cantons can decide on the requirements for home schooling as long as this ensures that there is sufficient primary education. No entitlement to home schooling can be derived from the Federal Constitution. The complainant therefore failed with her request. In the light of this current case law, the regulations on home schooling in the Canton of Zug appear to be in conformity with the Constitution.
The Zurich Higher Court ruled that the removal of the non-competition clause due to termination by the employer also removes the obligation to pay compensation for the non-competition clause.
Due to the Coronavirus situation the tax authorities of the Canton of Zug have taken various measures to support the…
Pursuant to the decree, the Federal Council has announced the start of the Easter judicial vacations in civil and administrative…
At its meeting on Wednesday, 26 February 2020, the Federal Council took note of the results of the consultation on the revision of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) and released the dispatch for the parliament. This was triggered by a motion submitted in November 2014, which demanded that the existing CCP be first examined for its suitability in practice and that the Federal Council then use the results to develop a draft with necessary adjustments. Purpose of this procedure was to adapt the CCP in a single draft and thus prevent it from being split into individual revision packages.