Facts
The appellant X. was convicted by the single judge in criminal matters of the District of Zurich based on Art. 20a UCA and Art. 3 and 8 para. 2 of the Ordinance on the Disclosure of Prices of 11 December 1978 to a fine of CHF 40.-, as he had not provided a clearly visible price label on a large part of the watches and jewelry items displayed in the shop windows of his businesses in Zurich. The cantonal nullity appeal against this decision was dismissed.
X. subsequently filed a federal nullity appeal, requesting that the decision of the High Court be set aside and the case be remanded to the lower instance for the annulment of the fine, the imposition of costs on the state treasury, and the award of compensation for expenses to the appellant.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the nullity appeal. It stated that Art. 8 para. 2 of the Ordinance, which requires the affixing of clearly legible price labels on or immediately next to the goods displayed in shop windows, is within the scope of the authority granted to the Federal Council in Art. 20a para. 2 UCA to regulate price disclosure and is also suitable to serve the fairness of competition and the protection of consumers, even in relation to luxury goods.
The Federal Supreme Court denied that the luxury character of the goods, the risk of theft, or the large number of…