Facts
The Civil Court of the Canton of Basel-Stadt granted definitive enforcement (Rechtsöffnung) to A. GmbH and B. against X. AG. X. AG then approached the Civil Court on June 10, 2013 and requested the revocation of the decisions as well as the recusal of President Stein-Wigger and Court Clerk Blatter. The Civil Court forwarded the submissions to the Court of Appeal, which accepted them as appeals (Beschwerden).
X. AG subsequently filed two civil law appeals (Beschwerden in Zivilsachen) directed against the rulings of the Court of Appeal. It requested the revocation of the rulings and the remission of the proceedings to the Civil Court.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court decided that the lower court correctly qualified the submissions of X. AG of June 10, 2013 as appeals (Beschwerden) pursuant to Art. 319 et seq. CPC. Although Art. 51 para. 3 CPC refers to the revision, it is permissible to assert the ground for recusal by way of appeal, as long as the appeal deadline has not yet expired.
The Federal Supreme Court justified this by stating that a court loses jurisdiction over a specific case as soon as it has rendered its judgment in that case (lata sententia iudex desinit esse iudex). Therefore, a…