Invalidity insurance benefits for obesity
According to previous case law, obesity (severe overweight) did not generally entitle the person concerned to an invalidity pension. The Federal Supreme Court has now changed its practice. Today, the fact that obesity is generally treatable no longer automatically excludes entitlement to a pension. Instead, each individual case must be examined to determine the extent to which the condition actually limits the person’s ability to work. As with other illnesses, there is also an obligation to reduce damages in cases of obesity. This means that an affected person is only entitled to a invalidity pension if they undertake reasonable measures (such as dietary or drug treatments, behavioural therapies or exercise programmes).
BGE 151 V 66
Yoko Ono is the owner of John Lennon’s watch
Yoko Ono gave John Lennon a watch for his 40th birthday in 1980. After his murder, the watch was kept in Yoko Ono’s flat. From there it came into possession of a former private chauffeur of Yoko Ono. A collector later acquired the watch in Germany and submitted it to an auction house in Geneva in 2014 to have its value estimated. Yoko Ono found out about this. The Federal Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by the collector and confirmed that Yoko Ono is the owner of the watch. Ownership was initially transferred to her by inheritance. It can be assumed that the watch was stolen by the chauffeur. The collector could not acquire ownership of the stolen item through acquisitive prescription.
BGE 151 III 122
Conviction for war crimes and crimes against humanity for acts committed during the first civil war in Liberia
Ruling on appeals against the conviction handed down at first instance by the Criminal Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court, the Higher Appeals Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court found a Liberian national guilty of violating the laws of war for acts committed between 1993 and 1995 in Liberia during the first civil war, while he was commander of an armed group. The Court found that he had, mainly, killed and had civilians executed, raped a civilian woman, violated the dignity of a deceased civilian, ordered lootings, ordered and directed forced transports carried out in inhumane conditions, and used a child soldier. The Higher Appeals Chamber also considered that the offences were part of a widespread attack against civilians and that they should be classified as crimes against humanity, as they were not time-barred when this standard was introduced into Swiss law in 2011. The Court handed down a 20-year prison sentence and ordered the defendant to be expelled from Switzerland for a period of 10 years. This decision has been appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Judgment CA.2022.8
AI is not an inventor
A US national filed an application with the Federal Institute of Intellectual Property to register a patent for a food container. He requested that his AI system be listed as the inventor since it had allegedly made the invention autonomously. The Federal Administrative Court upheld the dismissal of the appeal. Patent applications must name a natural person as the inventor. However, a natural person who participates in the artificial intelligence (AI) process and recognises the existence of the invention can qualify as the inventor.
Judgment B-2532/2024
Unlawful write-off of AT1 bonds
As part of the take-over of Credit Suisse by UBS, the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority ordered Credit Suisse in March 2023 to write off all AT1 bonds for a nominal value of approximately CHF 16.5 billion. About 3.000 complainants lodged appeals with the Federal Administrative Court against this decree in approximately 360 cases. In a partial decision, the Court revoked the decree for lack of a legal basis. The request for reversal of the write-off is still pending. Partial decision of 1 October
2025 in case B-2334/2023
Ortovox patent for avalanche transceiver partially invalid
The Federal Patent Court has partially upheld an action for annulment of a patent held by Ortovox by Swiss outdoor sports equipment manufacturer Mammut. In the court’s view, it is obvious and therefore not patentable to suppress the audio signal of an avalanche transceiver or to output it at a reduced volume while the transceiver is emitting a voice message. On the other hand, it is inventive to provide the user of an avalanche transceiver with additional instructions in the form of voice messages that are triggered by events related to the search.
Judgment O2023_012