Facts
[X.] (appellant) and his company [Z.] were parties to a tenancy agreement with [A.Y.] and [B.Y.] (respondents). [A.Y.] filed two conciliation requests against the appellant for rent arrears and tenant damage. The appellant and his company then filed conciliation requests and demanded a rent reduction. The tenants (appellant) filed a withdrawal request against the chairperson of the conciliation board on 2 August 2012. The chairperson rejected the grounds for withdrawal in a ruling of 11 September 2012, but summoned the parties to a conciliation hearing to be chaired by a substitute.
The appellant then filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft, demanding that the conciliation board be ordered to issue a contestable decision on the withdrawal request of 2 August 2012. However, the Cantonal Court did not enter into the complaint, as the chairperson of the conciliation board had recused herself from the relevant hearing, and thus there was no denial or delay of justice.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examined whether the appellant had a current and practical legal interest in the assessment of the complaint. It concluded that this was not the case, as the conciliation proceedings had already been completed. The permission to file a claim was granted to the respondents, and the proceedings in which the appellant appeared as the plaintiff were struck off due to non-appearance at the…