Facts
[X.] (husband), born in 1949, and [Y.] (wife), born in 1950, married in 1973 and were divorced. Within the divorce proceedings, the property settlement was disputed. Specifically, it concerned the assignment of a holiday home in [F.] and the valuation of the [X.] Architecture AG, whose registered shares are all owned by the husband.
The District Court assigned the holiday home to the wife and valued the corporation as a pure real estate company, whose value is based on the asset value. Both parties appealed against this judgment. The High Court confirmed the assignment of the holiday home to the wife, but did not value the corporation as a pure real estate company, but also considered the earnings value. It determined a company value of around CHF 655'903.--.
Considerations
The Federal Court notes that in the valuation of a company within the framework of the property settlement after divorce, the going concern value, which consists of asset value and earnings value, is generally decisive. A valuation based solely on the asset value is only indicated for pure real estate companies.
In the present case, the High Court rightly did not classify the [X.] Architecture AG as a pure real estate company, as the company generates income not only from real estate, but also from fees. Therefore, the High Court was allowed to take into account both the asset value and the earnings value in the company valuation.
The weighting of the asset value with the factor 8 and the earnings value with the factor 1 carried out by the High Court proves to be appropriate,…