Distinction between Partial Decision and Interlocutory Decision in the Combination of Principal and Subsidiary Claims

Facts

The case provides an opportunity to clarify the case law on the distinction between a partial decision under Art. 91(a) of the Federal Supreme Court Act (BGG) and an interlocutory decision under Art. 93 BGG in the case of cumulative subsidiary claims. The Federal Supreme Court refines its case law to the effect that the independent dismissal of a principal claim is not a partial decision, but an interlocutory decision.

For the assumption of a partial decision, it is not only required that the claims already adjudicated can be decided independently of the claims not yet adjudicated, but also that the claims not yet adjudicated can be decided independently of the claims already adjudicated. These requirements are not met in the case of the independent dismissal of a principal claim.

Principal and subsidiary claims are usually so closely linked that an independent assessment is not possible. Therefore, the independent dismissal of the principal claim is generally only appealable as an interlocutory decision under Art. 93 BGG.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court refines its case law on the distinction between partial decision and interlocutory decision in the case of cumulative subsidiary claims. It holds that the independent dismissal of a principal claim is not a partial decision, but an interlocutory decision.

For the assumption of a partial decision, it is required that not only the claims already adjudicated can be decided independently of the claims not yet adjudicated, but also that the claims not yet adjudicated can be decided…