Federal Supreme Court, 05.02.2026, 9C_61/2026
Facts
In proceedings concerning the radio and television license fee, the Federal Administrative Court (FAC) issued an interlocutory decision ordering a taxpayer to pay an advance on costs of CHF 1,000. In this decision and on the envelope, the FAC identified the taxpayer by her "First Name Last Name." The taxpayer appealed this interlocutory decision to the Federal Supreme Court (FSC). She requested, first, that the FAC be ordered to use the designation "Last Name, First Name" and, second, that it be established that the advance on costs had been paid on time.
Law
According toArt. 93 para. 1 let. a of the Federal Supreme Court Act (FSCA), an appeal against an interlocutory decision is only admissible if it may cause irreparable harm. This harm must be legal in nature, meaning it must infringe upon legally protected rights or interests, and cannot be merely factual (such as a delay or increase in the cost of proceedings). Such harm exists, in particular, in the event of a risk of loss of legal protection or a denial of access to a court. It is the responsibility of the appellant to demonstrate that this admissibility requirement is met (Art. 42 para. 2 FSCA), unless it is manifest. Furthermore, the FSC does not, in principle, rule on issues that have not been previously decided by the lower court (Art. 99 para. 2 FSCA).
Application to the specific case
The Federal Supreme Court examined whether the admissibility requirements for the appeal were met. Regarding the designation of the party, the FSC found that the appellant did not establish how the use of the "First Name Last Name" format instead of "Last Name, First Name" would cause her irreparable legal harm. She cited theoretical risks (confusion, enforcement issues) but failed to demonstrate their concrete probability in her case. The FSC reiterated its established case law that the common usage of "First Name Last Name" does not constitute a violation of law and that there is no legal obligation for courts to adopt the "Last Name, First Name" format. The condition under Art. 93 para. 1 let. a FSCA is therefore not met. Regarding the second request, the FSC noted that the contested decision was limited to requiring an advance on costs and did not rule on compliance with the payment deadline. This issue is therefore not the subject of the dispute. The request for a declaratory judgment is consequently a new claim, which is inadmissible under Art. 99 para. 2 FSCA.
Outcome
The Federal Supreme Court declared the appeal inadmissible. The court costs, amounting to CHF 1,000, are to be borne by the appellant.
Silex tax newsletter published in collaboration with Anna Vladau, Attorney at Law
