Facts
In December 1958 and January 1963, Mrs. H. gave birth to two children. In the summer of 1966, her husband legally contested the legitimacy of the two children. Before the Justice of the Peace and the District Court, Mrs. H. admitted that the plaintiff was not the father of the children. Medical and anthropological-genetic expert opinions confirmed that the plaintiff was most likely not the father. In the final hearing before the District Court, Mrs. H. declared that she acknowledged the claim, but requested that the costs be imposed on the plaintiff.
The District Court then declared the two children to be illegitimate. Only Mrs. H., not the co-defendants (the children), appealed against this judgment. The Higher Court did not enter into the appeal, as it interpreted Mrs. H.'s declaration as an acknowledgment of the claim and thus as consent to the judgment of the District Court, so that Mrs. H. was not aggrieved by this judgment and therefore not entitled to appeal.
Considerations
The Federal Court states that the Higher Court rightly based its decision on cantonal procedural law, as the interpretation of procedural declarations that affect procedural law is a matter of cantonal law. The Federal Court also sees no violation of the provisions of Art. 158 of the Swiss Civil Code (ZGB) applicable to the contestation proceedings, as Mrs. H. had the opportunity to…