SWITZERLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Peter Schramm, Timmy Pielmeier, Michael Ritscher and Andrea Schäffler, MLL Legal
11.2 Timeframes for Appealing Trial Court Decisions Under Swiss procedural law, only two instances are available for civil intellectual property disputes. Since only one cantonal instance decides on a case, all appeals are directed to the Federal Supreme Court. A decision may be appealed within 30 days after the written opening of the decision. It usually takes between one and three years to obtain a judgment before the cantonal court.
In those ex parte interim measures, the parties will be summoned to a hearing, or the opposing party will be asked to submit a written statement. This way, the right to be heard at a certain stage during the pro - ceedings is sufficiently granted to the opposing party. Also see 10.1 Injunctive Remedies . 10.5 Customs Seizures of Counterfeits or Parallel Imports The Federal Customs Administration is authorised to withhold infringing goods upon request of the trade mark owner or on its own accord. Within ten days after notification of the withholding of potentially infring - ing goods (extendable by another ten days), the trade mark owner must obtain an injunction from a civil court or a seizure order from a criminal prosecution authority, or must obtain the approval of the goods’ owner for the destruction of the withheld goods. Swiss law contains no special provisions concerning the appellate procedure for civil trade mark proceed - ings; therefore, such proceedings follow the regu - lar civil procedure rules. Decisions of civil courts on trade mark or copyright infringements (sole cantonal instances are appointed as first instance in both cas - es) can be appealed to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. Consequently, Switzerland provides only two instances in civil IP proceedings. The Federal Supreme Court primarily judges violations of the law. A review of the determination of the facts is only possible in exceptional cases, which means that the lower court’s determination of the facts is binding for the Federal Supreme Court. An incorrect determi - nation of the facts may only be asserted if it is: • obviously incorrect; or • based on a violation of the law. 11. Appeal 11.1 Appellate Procedure In both cases, it would have to be further shown that the rectification of the defect may be decisive for the outcome of the proceedings.
12. Additional Considerations 12.1 Emerging Issues Artificial Intelligence
On 12 February 2025, the Swiss Federal Coun - cil tasked the Federal Department of Justice and Police with preparing a public consultation draft for AI regulation by the end of 2026. This initiative aims to transpose the Council of Europe’s AI Convention into Swiss law, focusing on enhancing transparency, data protection, non-discrimination and regulatory oversight. The Federal Department of Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications and other federal departments will develop a companion plan for non-legislative actions like self-regulation and industry pledges. The approach favours targeted, sector-spe - cific amendments to existing laws instead of adopting an overarching AI-specific statute, balancing innova - tion with rights protection. Co-ordinated involvement of federal offices and external stakeholders ensures international alignment and effectiveness in Switzer - land’s AI governance. As far as is known, no specific IP rules are currently being considered. Neighbouring Right for Journalistic Media Companies The Swiss Federal Council transmitted its draft bill on 20 June 2025 to introduce a new neighbouring right to the Federal Assembly. Under this proposed law, large online platforms with an annual reach of at least 10 % of the Swiss population would be required to pay media companies for the use of journalistic snip - pets (text and image previews). Media companies and individual journalists would receive compensa - tion, with rights managed collectively through a col -
593 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook