Dismissal of the Claim due to Lack of Unlawfulness

Facts

[X. SA] (the Appellant) is a company domiciled in Montevideo, Uruguay, which produces telephone directories for 27 Brazilian states on behalf of the Brazilian publishing house [A.] . [Y. AG] (the Respondent) is a Swiss bank that offers banking and financial services of all kinds. The Appellant is asserting a claim based on non-contractual liability against the Respondent. It argues that the Respondent failed to comply with its duty of care in the context of the customer relationship with [B.] . [B.] had power of attorney access to an account of the Appellant and transferred USD 4 million from it to his own account with the Respondent. The Appellant saw this as misappropriation. The Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the Appellant's claim, as it did not consider the requirement of unlawfulness within the meaning of Art. 41 para. 1 CO to be fulfilled. The Appellant appealed against this judgment to the Federal Supreme Court in civil matters.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court dismisses the appeal. It concludes that the provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) cannot be considered as protective norms within the meaning of Art. 41 CO, as they primarily serve to combat money laundering in the financial sector and not to protect individual…