Facts
On January 1, 1979, A. as the landowner and B. and C. concluded a "Grass, Hay and Fruit Usage Contract" for a property. The beneficiaries B. and C. undertook to professionally care for the property, fertilize it, maintain the fruit trees, and keep the fencing and access roads in order.
The contractual relationship was terminated at the end of December 1980, with A. claiming damages for the neglect of the fruit orchard. As the assignee, D. AG filed a lawsuit against B. and C. with the District Court of Zurich on December 12, 1980, which was initially for CHF 5,051.20 and later expanded to CHF 9,275.10 plus interest.
The District Court of Zurich dismissed the claim due to lack of substantiation. The High Court of the Canton of Zurich and the Court of Cassation confirmed this decision. The plaintiff then appealed the judgment of the High Court, which the Federal Supreme Court dismissed.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court states that, in principle, federal substantive law decides whether a claim is sufficiently substantiated by the party's factual submissions. However, it is up to the cantonal procedural law whether it will allow a supplementation of the substantiation in the taking of evidence or already demand this in the main proceedings in a way that allows the review of the factual submissions in the taking of evidence.
In the present case, the plaintiff has justified the claimed amount of damages solely by referring to the invoice and work reports…