Facts
The Federal Supreme Court is dealing with two appeals against a judgment of the High Court of the Canton of Nidwalden. The appellant 1 ([X.] ) was convicted by the High Court of usury (Art. 157 para. 1 SCC) to the detriment of the respondent 2 ([Y.] ). Previously, [X.] had been found guilty by the Cantonal Court of Nidwalden of obtaining a false certification, fraud and multiple employment of a foreign national without a permit. However, the High Court acquitted him of the charge of obtaining a false certification and fraud, and instead convicted him of usury.
The facts can be summarized as follows: On 5 August 2004, [Y.] granted [X.] a gratuitous purchase option for several properties valid until 1 August 2014 by public deed. In the event of the exercise of the purchase option, the parties agreed on a purchase price of CHF 350,000. However, the Nidwalden Property Valuation Commission had estimated the properties at a value of CHF 325,000. [X.] was involved in this valuation as a commission secretary and knew that a much higher return could be realized on the open market for the properties. Furthermore, he was aware that [Y.] was in a financial distress.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court considers the conviction of [X.] for usury to be lawful. It states that for the assessment of whether there is an obvious disproportion between performance and consideration, the real market value is decisive. The expert opinion of [C.] rightly pointed out deficiencies in the market value assessment of the Property Valuation Commission, in particular with regard to the valuation of the residential building on plot No. xxx and the too high deduction for the residential right. Even if one…