Parties new to civil court procedures in Switzerland often have confidence in the Swiss courts, expecting a fair and efficient judicial process. But is this confidence justified?
In this article, we will shed light on the Swiss judicial system as it pertains to civil and commercial matters, providing a general overview of what you can expect. We'll start with the Swiss Federal Court and work our way through the cantonal levels.
The Swiss Federal Court
The Swiss Federal Court has served as the final ordinary instance in civil law disputes since 1874. In its inaugural year, 1875, the court received 50 civil law appeals and rendered 22 judgments, according to its annual report. In 2023 it received 1,616 and resolved 1,601 civil law appeals. Notably, of these 1,601 cases, the court resolved 1,465 in under a year, with only 14 cases extending beyond two years—the longest taking just over three and a half years.
Beyond resolving individual cases, the Swiss Federal Court plays a crucial role in ensuring the uniform application of federal law across Switzerland. Over the past 148 years, its case law has established a robust body of precedent that guides lower courts and authorities in interpreting and applying laws and regulations. However, the body of case law does arguably not develop as rapidly in new areas as it does in larger countries with higher caseloads.
Judges of the Swiss Federal Court are elected by the Swiss Parliament and must stand for re-election every six years. They are also required to pay a portion of their salary as a "party tax" to their political party, a practice that has drawn significant criticism both nationally and internationally. This debate highlights a broader tension between the traditional Swiss view of judges as democratically elected magistrates and a more modern perspective that sees the judiciary as a technical, professional body that should be selected based on expertise rather than political affiliation.
Despite these challenges, the Swiss Federal Court has proven resilient to political pressure. Its decisions—anonymized and published for transparency—are rigorously scrutinized by both scholars and the general press. On a lighter note, it’s safe to assume that a large majority of appellants leave the court unhappy, as only 11.94% of appeals were fully or partially admitted in 2023 (across all fields of law).
The Cantonal Courts (two instances)
Switzerland is a federal republic with 26 partly autonomous cantons, and its judicial system is deeply rooted in federalism. The administration of justice is primarily a cantonal responsibility, with each canton providing conciliation authorities and two court levels in civil matters. The first court level serves as the initial instance for general civil law cases, while the second level acts as an appellate court for first-instance decisions and as the first (and only) cantonal instance for specific commercial disputes.
While the cantonal courts handle most civil litigation, the Swiss Federal Patent Court stands as the only exception at the federal level for first-instance litigation between private parties.
The significant diversity among Switzerland's 26 cantons—in terms of population, economy, language, and culture—creates a correspondingly varied judicial landscape.
For example, Zurich, with a population of roughly 1.6 million and a GDP of around 147.9 billion Swiss francs in 2021, has 12 district courts (handling both civil and criminal cases) staffed by over 220 main judges and several hundred legal staff, including court clerks and associated judges. Its second level court, that includes the High Court and a Commercial court employs 56 main judges, 32 associated judges, and 115 law clerks as of 2024.
In contrast, Appenzell Innerrhoden, the smallest Swiss canton with a population of about 16,500 and a GDP of 1.1 billion Swiss francs, has a much more modest judicial structure. It operates a single court of first instance for civil and criminal matters, staffed by six full- and part-time judges and two law clerks. The cantonal court, which serves as the second instance in civil, criminal, and administrative matters, and also as the first and last instance in some commercial matters, employs 13 judges and three law clerks.
The size of a canton’s court system and the volume of cases it handles can significantly affect its ability to manage exceptionally complex and difficult cases. Smaller cantons, despite sometimes attracting global businesses, may find themselves overwhelmed by complex transnational cases more often than larger cantonal courts.
While the cantons' second-level courts publish some of their decisions, first-level courts generally do not. This lack of transparency and accessibility (even for the courts themselves) limits both the consistency and efficiency of their decision-making, making it an area with significant potential for improvement.
When measuring efficiency by the time taken to decide a case, the duration of first-instance court proceedings at Zurich's district courts (which handle non-commercial matters) provides an illustrative example. Of the 52,730 cases pending in 2023, 51,314 (97%) were resolved within 12 months, 948 (2%) took between one and two years, and 468 (1%) took more than two years to reach a conclusion, according to the courts' annual report. While these numbers indicate a generally efficient administration of justice in Zurich, it is also true that, in other cantons and in more complex transnational cases, we occasionally see extensively long procedures regularly extending beyond three years.
Conciliation Authorities
In Switzerland, the principle of “Schlichten vor Richten”—settling disputes before litigation—is deeply embedded in the country’s legal culture. The Swiss Code of Civil Procedure mandates that conciliation must precede formal court proceedings, with several exceptions, such as in commercial, divorce, or urgent matters.
The administration of conciliation authorities is also a cantonal responsibility, with most cantons providing a dense network of conciliation offices. For example, Zurich, with 160 municipalities, has 164 conciliation offices.
The professional backgrounds of conciliation officers varies across cantons. In some cantons, conciliation is led by court clerks or even judges, who can offer a more solid legal assessment of a case and propose settlements based on a legal view of the case. In other cantons, conciliation is conducted by laypersons, who simply use common sense or use mediation techniques to facilitate settlements.
In Zurich, 65% of the cases brought to conciliation authorities were successfully resolved, and only 17% ultimately proceeded to court, in 2023. Similar numbers are found in other cantons, demonstrating that the conciliation process is highly effective in Switzerland.
At the end of the day, the best dispute is often the one that never needs to go to court, regardless of how efficient the judicial system may be. However, when court intervention is necessary, it is reassuring to know that Switzerland generally offers a fair and comparably efficient system, ensuring that justice is accessible and effective when needed.
Comments