Facts
In this case, the issue was whether the unsuccessful accident insurer, Hotela Accident Insurance, had to bear the court costs for the proceedings before the Federal Supreme Court. The Federal Supreme Court had to decide whether accident insurers fall under the exception in Art. 66 para. 4 FSCA, according to which the Confederation, cantons, municipalities and organizations with public law duties are exempt from court costs in certain cases.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court concluded that accident insurers such as Hotela Accident Insurance do not fall under the exception in Art. 66 para. 4 FSCA. Although they fulfill public law duties within the framework of compulsory accident insurance in their official sphere of activity, they pursue their own financial interests, as the accident insurance is self-financed through premiums, investment income and recourse claims, and does not receive any state subsidies. Therefore, accident insurers are subject to court costs in benefit disputes before the Federal Supreme Court, and the unsuccessful party, here the Hotela Accident Insurance, has to bear the court costs.
In its decision, the Federal Supreme Court relied on the case law on the predecessor provisions in the former Organizational Act (OG) as well as on the wording and legislative history of Art. 66 para. 4 FSCA. It…