Facts
In 2008, X AG sold two properties to Y SA. In 2013, X AG filed a lawsuit seeking to declare the purchase contracts null and void and to have the land register corrected accordingly. The District Court did not enter into the claim, as it was a commercial dispute for which the Commercial Court had jurisdiction. The appeal filed by X AG against this decision was dismissed by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich.
X AG filed an appeal in civil matters with the Federal Supreme Court against this judgment. It argued that this was not a commercial dispute, but rather a purely in rem correction of the land register.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It stated that the term "business activity" within the meaning of Art. 6 para. 2 lit. a CPC should be interpreted broadly. This includes not only the core business, but also ancillary and secondary activities, as long as there is a connection with the business activity. In the present case, this connection was given, as the claim concerned the actions of the governing bodies of X AG in connection with the sale of the…