Facts
Since 1985, B.L. has operated a hairdressing business as a tenant in a property in Lucerne. Her husband A.L. joined the lease as a joint debtor in 1992. Due to various incidents such as noise disturbances, police interventions, and a mattress fire, the landlords admonished the tenants and demanded that they maintain peace and order. After a further police intervention, the landlords terminated the tenancy on April 25, 1995, effective May 31, 1995. The tenants did not contest the termination but remained in the rental property.
With an application dated June 26, 1995, the landlords requested the President of the District Court III of the City of Lucerne to evict the tenants. The President of the District Court determined the valid termination of the tenancy and ordered the tenants to vacate the rental property. On appeal by the tenants, the First Chamber of the High Court of the Canton of Lucerne confirmed the contested judgment on September 29, 1995 and authorized the landlords to have the eviction executed by the police.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court had to assess whether the eviction decision of the High Court was a final decision subject to appeal within the meaning of Art. 48 para. 1 OG.
According to the case law of the Federal Supreme Court, the appealability of an eviction decision is determined by the design of the cantonal procedural law. A final decision subject to appeal exists if the eviction judge makes a final judgment and the disputed claim cannot be the subject of further proceedings.
In the present case, the tenants had not contested the…