Non-entry on a request for revision for lack of functional jurisdiction of the Federal Supreme Court; referral back to the last cantonal instance

Facts

The KESB Basel-Stadt, by decision of 27 September 2018, ordered a curatorship for [B.] by way of a provisional measure. [B.] and her daughter [A.] appealed against this to the Appellationsgericht Basel-Stadt. The appeal against the refusal of suspensive effect was dismissed by the Federal Supreme Court in judgment 5A_33/2019 of 14 January 2019.

After the situation had stabilised and the curator had recommended lifting the provisional curatorship, the KESB concluded in its decision of 27 March 2019 that maintaining the measure against the will of the person concerned was no longer proportionate. It dispensed with further adult protection measures and did not validate the precautionary mandate of 22 August 2018.

On 28 March 2019 the Appellationsgericht struck the appeal (proceedings VD.2018.175) off the list as moot. The Federal Supreme Court did not enter on the appeal brought against this in judgment 5A_318/2019 of 25 April 2019.

By submission of 20 June 2019, [A.] and [B.] asked the Appellationsgericht to resume the proceedings VD.2018.175. By order of 7 August 2019, the Appellationsgericht forwarded the request, construed as a request for revision of the Federal Supreme Court judgment 5A_318/2019, to the Federal Supreme Court. [A.] also wrote to the Federal Supreme Court on 11 August 2019 and argued that there was no final adjudication by the Appellationsgericht.

The subject matter before the Federal Supreme Court was the request for revision of judgment 5A_318/2019 of 25 April 2019 (order VD.2018.175).

Considerations

The Appellationsgericht assumed that the applicants had intended to file a request for revision with the Federal Supreme Court, and derived the Federal Supreme Court's jurisdiction from the fact that it had been the last body dealing with the proceedings. The Federal Supreme Court notes that the submission of 20 June 2019 contains no indication of such a request for revision.

The Federal Supreme Court distinguishes between two situations: if an appeal was lodged with the Federal Supreme Court against a judgment of the last cantonal instance and the Federal Supreme Court decided the merits, its judgment replaces the cantonal decision, so that the Federal Supreme Court has jurisdiction over the revision. If, on the other hand, the Federal Supreme Court did not decide the merits, the cantonal decision becomes final and the last cantonal instance has jurisdiction over the request for revision (coordination provision of Art. 125 FSCA; BGE 138 II 386 consid. 6; BGE 134 III 669 consid. 2.2 under the former law pursuant to Art. 138 FJA).

Since the Federal Supreme…