Facts
The personal corporation [Y.] is the owner of agricultural land, which it leases to farmers. In 2009, the corporation's communal assembly passed a new agricultural lease regulation, which was approved by the government council of the canton of Lucerne. The corporation terminated all existing lease agreements and allocated the lease land anew. The appellant, [X.] , was allocated 515 ares of lease land, which she considered insufficient. She applied for a new allocation, which was rejected.
The appellant filed a complaint with the Administrative Court of the canton of Lucerne and requested that the lease allocation in her case and the entire new allocation be revoked and the matter be referred back for re-evaluation. The Administrative Court dismissed the complaint, insofar as it was entertained, and declared the proceedings concerning the appellant to be concluded.
The appellant lodged a complaint in public law matters with the FSCA and requested that the judgment of the Administrative Court be revoked and the matter be referred back for re-evaluation.
Considerations
The FSCA examined the jurisdiction and the legitimacy of the appellant. It found that the complaint in public law matters was admissible, as it concerned a public law matter. The appellant, as the affected tenant, was entitled to challenge the lease allocation.
The FSCA examined the appellant's complaint that the lower court had acted arbitrarily by not revoking the new allocation of the lease land. It found that the lower court had made the new allocation on the basis of the agricultural lease regulation and the criteria of favorable location and maintenance of existing conditions. The FSCA found that the lower court had not acted arbitrarily, as the new allocation was based on a factual basis.
The FSCA also examined the appellant's complaint that the lower court had violated the duty to provide reasons by not sufficiently stating the grounds for the new allocation. It found that…