Facts
The appellant and the respondent married in 1970 and have three sons. They are jointly involved in various companies in the metal trade and metal processing. In 1985, they acquired [A. AG] . The appellant filed a divorce lawsuit in 1998, but withdrew it. Since 2005, the spouses have been living separately. In 2009, the appellant again sued for divorce, which the respondent accepted. The spouses waived post-marital maintenance and claims from occupational pension provision.
The allocation of [A. AG] shares and replacement claims for investments in the appellant's separate property remained in dispute. The District Court divorced the couple, established that no post-marital maintenance was owed, and refrained from dividing the occupational pension provision funds. The High Court partially overturned the District Court's decision and ordered the internal auction of the shares among the parties.
Considerations
1. Admissibility of the Appeal
The appeal is directed against the decision of the High Court of the Canton of Aargau and concerns the property division according to the provisions on participation in acquired property. The amount in dispute exceeds the statutory minimum of CHF 30,000.--. The appeal is therefore admissible.
2. Procedural Irregularities
The appellant complains that she was no longer legally represented before the High Court and that the High Court did not fulfill its duty of care and clarification. However, the Federal Court finds that the appellant decided to conduct the appeal proceedings herself and that the High Court fulfilled its duty of clarification.
3. Property Division
The Federal Court finds that the appellant has asserted a replacement claim of her separate property against the acquired property of both spouses. However, the High Court found that the appellant did not prove that she…