Federal Supreme Court, 16.01.2026, 9C_662/2025, 9C_669/2025, 9C_670/2025
Facts
A property owner in Corsier-sur-Vevey was assessed by the Riviera-Villeneuve Intercommunal Tourist Tax Commission (CITS) for the years 2013 to 2023 in respect of the secondary residence tax. Upon appeal, the Corsier-sur-Vevey Municipal Tax Appeals Commission ultimately upheld the assessment for the 2018 to 2023 periods, dismissing the earlier years due to the statute of limitations. The owner then appealed to the Vaud Cantonal Court, which granted the appeal and annulled the decision, ruling that the individual was not subject to this tax. The CITS, the Municipality of Corsier-sur-Vevey, and the Municipal Tax Appeals Commission each filed a public law appeal against this cantonal judgment with the Federal Supreme Court.
Law
The Federal Supreme Court examines the admissibility of appeals ex officio, in particular the standing of public entities and their authorities to appeal, which is governed byArt. 89 of the Federal Supreme Court Act (FSCA).
Under Art. 89 para. 1 FSCA, a public entity may appeal if its financial interests are affected in a manner analogous to those of a private individual, or if its public authority prerogatives are affected and it has a specific, protectable public interest. A mere financial interest or a general interest in the correct application of the law is insufficient. Furthermore, only an entity with legal personality may invoke this provision.
Under Art. 89 para. 2 let. c FSCA, a municipality may appeal if it alleges a violation of constitutional guarantees, such as its autonomy (Art. 50 Cst.). Such a claim must be substantiated with specific reasoning (Art. 106 para. 2 FSCA), explaining precisely how the contested act constitutes an inadmissible infringement of the invoked autonomy.
Finally, an appellate authority that has been overruled by a higher judicial body is, in principle, not entitled to challenge that decision.
Application to the case at hand
The Federal Supreme Court analyzes the standing to appeal of each of the three appellant entities.
Municipality of Corsier-sur-Vevey: Its appeal is deemed inadmissible.
- Within the meaning of Art. 89 para. 1 FSCA, it is merely defending a financial interest linked to its tax prerogatives. The amount at stake is not sufficient to threaten its financial existence, and the general interest in combating "empty beds" does not constitute a specific, protectable interest.
- Under Article 89(2)(c) of the Federal Supreme Court Act (LTF), the municipality claims a violation of its autonomy but fails to provide sufficient grounds for its grievance. It merely asserts its autonomy in tax matters without demonstrating how the cantonal judgment, which concerns a specific application, would constitute an inadmissible infringement.
CITS and the Appeals Commission for Municipal Taxes: Their appeals are also deemed inadmissible.
- These two entities are administrative authorities lacking legal personality. In the absence of legal autonomy, they cannot act in their own name before the Federal Supreme Court under Article 89(1) LTF.
- Furthermore, the Appeals Commission, as an appellate authority overruled by the Cantonal Court, lacks the standing to challenge the latter's judgment.
Outcome
The Federal Supreme Court joins the three cases and declares all three appeals inadmissible. The legal costs are charged to the Municipality of Corsier-sur-Vevey, whose financial interest was at stake.
Silex tax newsletter published in collaboration with Anna Vladau, Attorney at Law
