Facts
The Federal Supreme Court had to rule on an administrative appeal by X. and Y. against the decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz not to consider their appeal. The appellants had opposed the building permit for a large facility for the treatment of mineral construction waste, which the Municipal Council of Freienbach had granted to Z. AG. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz did not consider the appeal, and the Federal Supreme Court dismissed the administrative appeal.
The appellants had requested in their appeal that any statements by the respondents be served on them for comment, or at least for their attention. The Federal Supreme Court had served the appellants with the statements of the respondent, the Government Council, and the Administrative Court, as well as the comments of the Federal Office for the Environment, for their attention, and the appellants had not reacted.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court stated that a party's right to reply in the context of court proceedings is a component of the constitutional right to be heard (Art. 29 para. 2 Cst.). Within the scope of Art. 6 para. 1 ECHR, it is not permissible for courts to deny a party the right to comment on statements or observations submitted by other parties to the proceedings, lower authorities, and other bodies.
The court found that Art. 29 para. 2 Cst. and Art. 6 para. 1 ECHR have the same significance with regard to the right to reply in court proceedings. It stated that courts must also respect the principle of the right to reply outside of Art. 6 para.…