Facts
The welfare fund of [X. AG] was established in 1984 and has since changed its name several times. In 2003, the fund was partially liquidated and only consisted of employer contribution reserves. The complainant, [S.] , a member of the foundation board, filed a complaint with the Office for Occupational Pensions and Foundations of the Canton of Zurich in 2007, as he believed that the relocation of the headquarters of [A. AG] and its merger with [D. AG] were abusive and aimed at using the employer contribution reserves for the benefit of [D. AG] . The office dismissed the requests, and the Federal Administrative Court confirmed this decision.
The complainant filed a complaint in public law matters and requested the annulment of the office's decision. The welfare fund of [X. AG] and the Office for Occupational Pensions and Foundations of the Canton of Zurich requested the dismissal of the complaint.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the formal validity requirements of the preceding proceedings and found that the complainant is not a beneficiary of the foundation and cannot demonstrate a special personal interest in pursuing the foundation's purpose. The foundation supervision complaint requires the complainant's own interest, which is not sufficient due to the mere possibility of receiving a benefit or another advantage from the foundation.
The Federal Court distinguished between the formal foundation supervision complaint and the supervisory complaint. The supervisory complaint is an informal remedy, where the complainant does not acquire party status and does not have the possibility to appeal a negative…