Not entering into an insufficiently substantiated appeal in public law matters

Facts

The condominium owners' associations A.A. and A.B. as well as other individuals filed an appeal against the decision of the Building Authority of the City of Zurich, which granted the X. AG permission to construct a base station for mobile phone networks on the building Y.-Strasse 5. The appellants requested that the permit be revoked and the mobile phone facility not be constructed. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich partially upheld the appeal and obliged the building owner to include the approved mobile phone facility in its quality assurance system. The condominium owners' associations filed an appeal in public law matters and a subsidiary constitutional appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.

The appellants requested that the appeal be entered into and upheld. The X. AG requested that the appeal not be entered into, and in the alternative, that it be dismissed. The Federal Supreme Court did not enter into the appeal because the appeal brief did not meet the requirements for substantiation.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court examined whether the appeal met the requirements for substantiation. According to Art. 42 para. 2 FSCA, the grounds for the appeal must be stated in a concise manner, indicating how the contested decision violates the law. This requires that the appellant at least briefly address the considerations of the contested decision.

The appeal brief did not meet these requirements for substantiation, as it did not address the considerations of the Administrative Court and did not explain how these considerations violated federal law. The appellants requested that they be granted an extension to improve their appeal, but this was rejected because the appellants were represented by…