We are pleased to share with you some news and insights about what PBM achieved so far.
A professional football player competing in the Swiss Super League was demoted to the U21 squad by his club for "sporting reasons." Challenging this decision, he sought an urgent court order requesting, among other things, his immediate reinstatement to the first team with full access to training
A lawyer, registered in the cantonal register, was advising clients on tax matters. The fees were billed to a trust managed by a trustee, who was himself a lawyer. After several years, the clients terminated the mandate and contested the final invoices, which they considered excessive.
Hiring a cleaning lady, nanny, or gardener without formalizing the employment relationship may seem trivial. In Switzerland, however, this practice is illegal—even if the work is occasional, low-paid, or paid in cash.
In this case, the Public Prosecutor ordered the seizure of two notebooks and subsequently requested the lifting of the seals, which was ultimately granted by the Coercive Measures Court (TMC).
Article 273, paragraph 1 of the Swiss Civil Code (CC) guarantees the right to personal relations between a child and the parent who does not have parental authority or custody.
On November 2, 2024, Article 5 para. 1 let. b of the General Law on Development Zones (LGZD) was substantially amended. It now states that “properties intended for sale are reserved for individuals subject to income tax who have been residing in Geneva for at least 4 years.”
An individual, found with 180 hemp plants and 7 grams of marijuana, is convicted by the Public Prosecutor's Office (hereinafter "the MP") of St. Gallen for drug importation. After appealing, he is acquitted of importation for personal use, but the drug importation offense is confirmed.
In this case, the sale of a vehicle took place between the appellant and the respondent. Although the sale had been concluded, the appellant later attempted to register the vehicle in her own name.
The Swiss Federal Tribunal ruling 148 III 343 provides significant insight into the limits of railway operators' liability when faced with the gross negligence of victims.