Family Law 2024

Last Updated February 29, 2024

Switzerland

Law and Practice

Authors



BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy is a Geneva-based law firm founded over 35 years ago. The firm’s seven attorneys specialise in various fields of law, with a particular focus on family law matters, including national and international divorce, registered partnerships, prenuptial and postnuptial agreements, international child abduction, splitting of matrimonial estates and occupational pension schemes, medically assisted procreation including surrogacy and its implications in Switzerland, recognition and enforcement of foreign orders and judgments, and family criminal law. BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy is one of the four Swiss firms ranked as a Leading Firm in the Chambers High New Worth Guide. Alain Berger and Marie Berger are fellow members of the IAFL (International Academy of Family Lawyers) and individually ranked in the Chambers High New Worth Guide.

Grounds for Divorce

There are three grounds for divorce under Swiss law:

  • divorce on joint petition (Articles 111 and 112 of the Civil Code);
  • divorce on unilateral petition (Article 114 of the Civil Code); and
  • divorce on serious grounds which make the continuation of the marriage unbearable (Article 115 of the Civil Code).

Swiss law does not recognise the principle of divorce for fault (divorce pour faute).

The same rules apply to same-sex marriages. However, there are some differences for registered partnerships. The dissolution of registered partnerships is governed by the Swiss Federal Act on Registered Partnerships between Persons of the Same Sex (LPart). The LPart provides for dissolution by joint petition (Article 29 of the LPart) or by unilateral request (Article 30 of the LPart).

To divorce, the parties are obliged to go before a judge, but the procedure varies depending on the grounds for divorce.

In the case of divorce on joint petition, the parties apply for divorce by filing a joint petition with the court and producing a complete agreement settling the effects of the divorce (Article 111 of the Civil Code). They may also ask the judge to settle the effects of the divorce (in this case, the agreement is solely on the principle of divorce; Article 112 of the Civil Code and Article 286 of the Civil Procedure Code). No separation period is required to file for divorce jointly. The judge must ensure that the parties have filed their petition and agreement after careful consideration and of their own free will (Article 111.2 of the Civil Code), and that the agreement is clear, complete and not manifestly unfair (Article 279 of the Civil Procedure Code). The judge checks carefully that the agreement concerning the children and the pension fund can be validated. In this respect, the judge is not bound by the parties’ conclusions.

In the case of divorce on unilateral petition, a spouse may file for divorce alone, but a two-year period must elapse since the separation before he or she can validly file for divorce on unilateral petition. Once this period has elapsed, there is an absolute right to divorce. The time limit begins to run from the end of cohabitation, and it is up to the divorce petitioner to prove this date. A judicial separation order is not required.

However, a single spouse may file for divorce before the two-year period has expired if there are serious grounds that make the continuation of the marriage unbearable (Article 115 of the Civil Code). These include cases of violence.

Service of Divorce Proceedings

Several international conventions on service apply in Switzerland, including the:

  • HCCH Convention on Civil Procedure 1954 (Hague Civil Procedure Convention); and
  • HCCH Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters 1965 (Hague Service Convention).

There is a central authority in each contracting state that undertakes to receive requests for service from other contracting states (Article 2 of the Hague Service Convention).

Religious Marriage

Article 97.3 of the Civil Code stipulates that a religious marriage may not precede a civil marriage. A religious marriage celebrated before a civil marriage is considered null and void.

The situation is different if a religious marriage is validly celebrated abroad. In this case, it will be recognised within the meaning of Article 45 para. 1 of the Federal Act on Private International Law (PILA).

Switzerland does not recognise religious divorces since a divorce must be granted by a judge under Swiss law. However, such divorces may be recognised if they:

  • have been rendered in the state of the spouses’ domicile or habitual residence, or in the state of citizenship of one spouse, or recognised in one of those states (Article 65.1 of the PILA);
  • have been subject to an official procedure, whether judiciary, administrative or religious;
  • are recognised in the state in which they were rendered;
  • have produced the legal effect of the dissolution of the marriage; and
  • are not contrary to Swiss public order.

(Article 27 of the PILA).

Marriage Annulment

There are two types of action for marriage annulment: one subject to a time limit and the other which can be requested at any time.

The annulment of a marriage can be requested at any time if, at the time of the marriage (Article 105 of the Civil Code):

  • one of the spouses was already married and the previous marriage had not been dissolved by divorce or the death of the previous spouse;
  • one of the spouses lacked capacity at the time of the wedding and has not regained such capacity since;
  • the marriage was prohibited due to kinship;
  • one of the spouses has no intention of living with the other but wished to circumvent the provisions on the admission and residence of foreign nationals;
  • a spouse has not married of their own free will; or
  • one of the spouses is a minor.

Any person having an interest in the annulment of the marriage may file the action at the domicile of the spouses.  If one of these grounds is established, the petition for annulment is open-ended and imprescriptible. 

The annulment of a marriage may also be requested if it is established that one of the spouses:

  • temporarily lacked capacity at the time of the wedding;
  • consented to the marriage in error (either because the spouse did not want to get married or did not wish to marry that person); or
  • consented to the marriage because they were intentionally deceived as to essential personal attributes of the other spouse.

A petition for annulment of the marriage must be brought within six months of the ground for the annulment becoming known. There is an absolute statute of limitations of five years from the time of marriage (Article 108.1 of the Civil Code).

Judicial Separation

There are two types of judicial separation (for both same-sex and opposite-sex marriages), which are outlined below.

Legal separation (Article 117, Civil Code et seq)

If a ground for divorce is given, the spouses can individually or jointly petition the court for a separation order instead of filing for divorce. This type of legal separation is rare and intended for couples who, for example, do not want to divorce due to:

  • religious reasons;
  • their age;
  • estate consequences; or
  • a negative impact of divorce on the widow’s or widower’s pension under the rules of an occupational pension plan.

In such cases, a legal division of property takes place (Article 118.1 of the Civil Code).

Dissolution of the joint household (Article 175 of the Civil Code et seq)

One spouse is entitled to discontinue the joint household if their personal rights, their financial security or the welfare of the family are seriously endangered by living together (Article 175 of the Civil Code). This allows for a separation when one spouse unilaterally intends to begin the two-year separation period in accordance with Article 114 of the Civil Code.

Jurisdictional Grounds

Swiss courts have jurisdiction over divorce if their jurisdiction contains:

  • the domicile of the defendant spouse; or
  • the domicile of the claimant spouse if the claimant has been resident in Switzerland for a year or is Swiss.

(Article 59 of the PILA).

If the spouses have no domicile in Switzerland but one of them is a Swiss citizen, the courts of his/her place of origin in Switzerland may have jurisdiction over divorce if the action cannot be brought at the foreign domicile of one of the spouses or it is unreasonable to do so (Article 60 of the PILA).

In principle, the judge in charge of the divorce or of the legal separation also has powers to rule on accessory effects. However, international treaties, such as the Lugano Convention, take precedence (Articles 1.2 and 63.1 of the PILA).

The above-mentioned rules also apply to the dissolution of same-sex couples’ registered partnerships (Article 65a of the PILA).

Domicile, Habitual Residence and Nationality

The domicile of individuals is in the state in which they reside with the intention to remain permanently (Article 20 of the PILA).

The definition of domicile in the Federal Act on International Private Law consists of an objective element (the physical presence of a person at one place) and a subjective element (the intention to remain at this place permanently). The domicile is located where the centre of the vital interests is objectively determined to be, by reference to the family’s financial and social interests. A minimum length of stay is not necessary.

The habitual residence of individuals is in the state in which they live for a certain period of time, even if this time period is limited from the outset (Article 20 of the PILA.)

The citizenship of a person is determined by the law of the state of the citizenship in question (Article 22 of the PILA).

Contesting Jurisdiction and Suspension in the Event of Foreign Jurisdiction

A party can contest the jurisdiction if the conditions of Article 59 of the PILA are not fulfilled.

Under the Federal Act on Private International Law, if the same parties are engaged in proceedings abroad based on the same causes of action, the Swiss court will stay the proceeding if it can be expected that the foreign court will, within a reasonable time, render a decision that will be recognisable in Switzerland (Article 9.1 of the PILA).

The date of the first act necessary to institute the action is decisive in determining when a court in Switzerland is seized. In a petition for divorce, proceedings are therefore initiated at the very first step, by the filing of the petition (Article 9.2 of the PILA and Article 62 of the Civil Procedure Code). The exact moment the foreign court is considered seized is determined by the foreign law.

Where a party requests a stay of proceedings because a foreign court has been seized, the judge must examine whether the conditions for suspension on the grounds of prior proceedings are met. If this is the case, the judge must suspend the proceedings in Switzerland, and will dismiss the action as soon as a foreign decision that can be recognised in Switzerland is submitted to it (Article 9.3 of the PILA). However, if the conditions are not met, the Swiss court shall reject the request for a stay of proceedings and continue to examine the case, regardless of whether the proceedings continue abroad.

Where there is exclusive Swiss jurisdiction, for example in matters relating to Swiss pension funds or in application of the Hague Child Protection Convention, a referral to a foreign court, even if previously seized, will have no effect on Swiss jurisdiction.

The grounds for jurisdiction for commencing financial proceedings depend on the type of financial issues that arise. In principle, these are either to settle the maintenance contributions due to the spouse and/or children, the liquidation of the matrimonial property regime, or the division of pension funds.

Generally speaking, if the Swiss court has jurisdiction to rule on the divorce, it also has jurisdiction to rule on the ancillary effects, subject to international conventions, such as the Lugano Convention, if applicable, for maintenance contributions. Of course, if the conditions for jurisdiction are not met, the opposing party may object to the jurisdiction of the Swiss court. In principle, if the conditions for jurisdiction are not met, the application will be rejected. On the other hand, the proceedings may be suspended, particularly in the event of lis pendens.

Finally, the courts can hear financial claims in Switzerland after a foreign divorce. This happens in particular when the Swiss judge is called upon to supplement a foreign judgment that does not rule on one of the relevant financial issues, or of course when a party requests the modification of a foreign judgment. Furthermore, in occupational pension matters, there is exclusive Swiss jurisdiction if funds are held in the hands of a Swiss pension fund.

Several international conventions on service apply in Switzerland, including the:

  • HCCH Convention on Civil Procedure 1954 (Hague Civil Procedure Convention); and
  • HCCH Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters 1965 (Hague Service Convention).

There is a central authority in each contracting state that undertakes to receive requests for service from other contracting states (Article 2 of the Hague Service Convention).

The process and timeline for financial questions depend on which type of proceedings they are integrated into, particularly whether they are independent claims or claims integrated into divorce proceedings.

Property Regime

The choice of a matrimonial property regime influences the division of the assets in the case of divorce, death or change of matrimonial regime.

Swiss law provides for three matrimonial property regimes, but the spouses can include specific clauses in a prenuptial or postnuptial marital contract in a public deed derogating from or supplementing the matrimonial property regime chosen, within certain statutory limits.

Shared acquired property (Articles 196 et seq of the Civil Code)

This is the default Swiss matrimonial property regime, which always applies when the spouses have not made a specific choice for an alternative regime in a marital contract agreement.

Under this regime, there is a distinction between:

  • individual property, including assets belonging to a spouse before the marriage, or acquired later by gift or inheritance; and
  • acquisitions, which include assets acquired mainly through work or income from individual property during the marriage.

Income from individual property usually qualifies as acquisitions. This includes income from trusts (depending, however, on the kind of trust, periodicity of distribution, etc) and from shares in a company. But whether a property is an individual’s property, or an acquisition is scrutinised by the judge in the light of all the circumstances.

In the case of divorce, each spouse recovers their individual property and is entitled to half the value of the other spouse’s acquisitions, less half the value of their own acquisitions (Article 207. 1 and 215.1 of the Civil Code).

In addition, the spouses must settle what they owe each other and their debts to third parties. A debt is linked to the property to which it is objectively connected or, where there is doubt, to the relevant acquisitions (Article 209.2 of the Civil Code). During the division of property, a compensation claim arises when acquisition debts were paid from the individual property of one spouse or from the acquisitions of one spouse (Article 209.1 of the Civil Code).

Concrete assets, such as real estate or cars, are estimated at their market value at the time of the liquidation of the matrimonial regime. Bank assets and other receivables are valued as of the time of the filing of the divorce application.

In addition, if a spouse has contributed without compensation to the acquisition, improvement, or preservation of assets, and if an added value exists at the time of division, the spouse has a claim that is proportional to the amount of their contribution.

There is a presumption under Swiss law that if no proof of a spouse’s sole ownership over an asset can be provided, the asset is presumed to be co-owned by the spouses (Article 200.2 of the Civil Code).

Joint property (Articles 221 et seq of the Civil Code)

Each spouse owns their own individual property, which consists of items for the exclusive personal use of a spouse, and of certain claims for compensation. Administration and disposition over common property must be performed jointly and separately from everyday management. Consequently, a spouse’s ability to transfer certain assets to a company or a trust is very limited and requires both spouses’ consent (Article 228.1 of the Civil Code).

Spouses rarely choose this Swiss matrimonial regime.

Separation of property (Articles 247 et seq of the Civil Code)

The marriage has no effect on the spouses’ assets. Each spouse is entitled to freely dispose of their assets and to transfer them to a third person, company, or a trustee, except the family home, which is protected by special matrimonial legal provisions and requires the agreement of the other spouse.

In the case of divorce, a division of property is not necessary, and each spouse retains their assets and there are no monetary compensation claims between spouses.

Trust

If a spouse is a settlor of a trust, the question arises whether the trust assets should be taken into consideration in the liquidation of the matrimonial property regime. The decisive question is whether a spouse can validly transfer assets into the trust.

If a transfer into a trust is valid, the assets are no longer considered to be the spouses’ property and are in principle not considered in the liquidation of the matrimonial regime.

However, such assets can be considered when calculating the spouses’ matrimonial property claims.

In the case of a “sham trust”, the transfer of assets is not valid, and the assets remain in the settlor’s and/or in the deprived spouse’s ownership. However, transfers made to a trust by a spouse during the marriage will be considered when computing the spouses’ matrimonial property claims if the transferred assets qualify as acquisitions and the transfer was made either:

  • within five years prior to the dissolution of the marital property regime, without consideration and without the other spouse’s consent (except for usual gifts); or
  • with the intent of diminishing the other spouse’s share in the matrimonial regime (Article 208 of the Civil Code).

The transfer will therefore be considered invalid, and the value of these assets will be added to the acquisitions of the spouse and, in principle, increase the other spouse’s monetary claim in the case of divorce. If the remaining assets are insufficient to compensate the spouse in accordance with the divorce decree, the deprived spouse has a direct claim against the trustee and possibly against a beneficiary up to the amount of the shortfall (Article 220 of the Civil Code; Article 15.1b of the HCCH Convention on the Law Applicable to Trusts and on their Recognition 1985 (the “Hague Trusts Convention”)).

Financial Orders to Regulate or Reallocate Assets or Resources on Divorce

Depending on the outcome reached by the judge, for example in the liquidation of property relations, he or she may order one spouse to pay a lump sum to settle all accounts. The judge may also award full ownership of a property in Switzerland to one of the spouses, or even order the sale of the property by auction.

In the case of pension funds, the court can order Swiss pension funds to transfer an amount from one spouse’s account to the other, in principle to a pension fund.

In matrimonial property settlement matters, the judge is bound by the parties’ submissions and cannot award anything other than what is requested.

Identifying Assets and Disclosure Process

The court will be informed of the assets of the spouses through various documents, including tax returns, and of course by the allegations of each of them. The judge may order the parties to produce documents relating to their financial situation and may also contact third parties directly, in Switzerland or abroad, through mutual assistance, to request documents not produced directly by the spouses. The court does not conduct exploratory searches, concentrating its enquiries on third parties who are likely to have information relevant to the resolution of the dispute.

In case of divorce, in deciding whether a maintenance contribution is to be given and, if so, in what amount and for how long, the court must consider the following non-exhaustive criteria:

  • division of duties during the marriage;
  • duration of the marriage;
  • standard of living during the marriage;
  • age and health of the spouses;
  • income and assets of the spouses;
  • extent and duration of childcare still required of the spouses;
  • vocational training and earning prospects of the spouses; and
  • expected entitlements of private or public pension plans.

The calculation is made on a case-by-case basis. Support tables are not used. The case law of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court has developed some principles for calculating maintenance contributions, but the cantonal judge has discretionary power to decide the amount of the maintenance contribution.

The actual income earned by the parties is taken as the main basis for determining the maintenance contribution. A hypothetical income can be considered if it is reasonable and possible to realise it. Income includes not only income from work, but also income from assets.

A spouse who raises one or more children is in principle not required to engage in gainful occupation until they have turned four. After that, in general:

  • Working part-time (50%) is required after the youngest child has turned four.
  • Working part-time (80%) is required after the youngest child has turned twelve.
  • After the youngest child has turned sixteen, the caretaking parent is expected to work full-time.

The costs of caring for and raising the child (contribution de prise en charge) are calculated by taking into consideration the essential needs of the caring parent, which are added to the direct or effective costs of the child.

Post-marital support is normally paid in periodic, usually monthly, instalments. If circumstances justify it, the court may also grant a lump-sum payment (Article 126. 2 of the Civil Code).

A spouse can ask the judge to award provisional alimony for the period of the divorce proceedings.

In separation proceedings, the judge decides on the right to and the amount of the maintenance contribution (Article 176.1 no. 1 of the Civil Code) based on the economic capacity and respective needs of the spouses. A hypothetical revenue can at this stage already be set by the judge.

During the period of separation, the right to maintenance is broader than in divorce because the ties of the marriage are still existing. The spouses are entitled to maintain their economic standard of living, whereas this is not the case during the divorce. However, the principles set out above also apply in the event of separation.

Spousal maintenance may be awarded for a fixed term or until the retirement of the debtor.

After their retirement, the divorced spouses will each benefit of the old age provisions.

A marital contract (contrat de mariage) is binding on the court and no ratification is therefore needed. A marital contract allows the parties to predict with almost absolute certainty what will happen post-divorce to assets they already own or will acquire during the marriage. This kind of marital agreement can be executed before or after the marriage. Spouses can adopt one of the three possible matrimonial regimes under Swiss law:

  • shared acquired property (Articles 196 of the Civil Code et seq);
  • joint property (Articles 221 of the Civil Code et seq); or
  • separation of property (Articles 247 to 251 of the Civil Code).

These regimes can be adopted or modified at any time, within the limits of the law. The desired marriage contract can include a choice of foreign law for the matrimonial regime (Articles 52 and 53 of the PILA) and, if entered in Switzerland, must be in the form of a public deed (Article 184 of the Civil Code). The form of a marital property agreement is valid if it fulfils the requirements of the law applicable to the agreement or of the place where it was entered. Prenuptial agreements entered abroad are recognised in Switzerland if they were drawn up and executed in a valid form and do not violate Swiss public policy.

Recognition of Foreign Pre-nuptial Agreement

The spouses may choose:

  • the law of the state in which they are both domiciled or will be domiciled after the celebration of marriage;
  • the law of the place of celebration of the marriage; or
  • the law of a state of which either of them is a citizen.

(Article 52.2 of the PILA).

A marital agreement on the matrimonial property regime, which does not provide for the other effects of a divorce, qualifies as a marital contract and is not subject to judicial review for fairness.

Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements for children and pension funds are not binding at all on the Swiss court.

The admissibility of the regulation of post-marital maintenance in a marriage contract is subject to judicial ratification, which will not be given if the result deviates too significantly from the solution that the judge would reach by applying the law.

Under Swiss law, cohabitation is the community of life formed by a heterosexual or homosexual couple living together in a marital relationship without being bound by the ties of marriage or registered partnership. There is no legislation that explicitly governs cohabitation, and it is therefore up to the courts to determine the criteria for defining a relationship as cohabitation. Cohabitation implies a stable and lasting community having the appearance of marriage.

As cohabitation is not regulated by law, it is advisable to draw up a written agreement. This document does not need to be notarised if it does not contain instructions regarding inheritance.

No mutual support claims are possible, even if couples have lived together for a long period of time.

Legal provisions governing simple partnerships are applicable for certain financial aspects of cohabitation. In principle, the rules of a simple partnership (Article 530 and seq of the Code of Obligations) apply when the cohabitation aims to achieve a specific goal or economic prosperity and the cohabitants work together to achieve this goal, and not only to meet the needs of the household (for instance a common real estate project).

In the case of termination without contract or amicable settlement, liquidation follows in principle the rules of simple partnership, insofar as this simple partnership has been admitted. In such cases, each person recovers the assets they have provided, and the accumulated profits/losses are shared equally among the partners (Article 549 of the Code of Obligations).

Non-payment of a Financial Order

Any claim against debtors with their domicile in Switzerland must be collected through proceedings under the Federal law on Collection of Debts and Bankruptcy 1889 (LPD) (Article 38). The LPD applies to claims based on judgments rendered in Switzerland or abroad.

The procedure starts with the notification of an order of payment, which may be opposed by the debtor. If so, a judge decides on this opposition through summary proceedings if the claim is based on a judgment (Article 80 of the LPD). If the claim is based on a foreign judgment, the judge will first rule in an ancillary decision on the enforceability of the decision in Switzerland, including in the attachment proceedings.

If the claim is upheld, the assets of the debtor can be seized by the Debt Collection Office and the liquid assets remitted to the creditor (Article 89 of the LPD). Illiquid assets, such as movables or real estate properties, are sold (in principle in an auction (Article 125 of the LPD)), and the proceeds of the sale remitted to the creditor (Article 144 of the LPD).

These principles apply to the enforcement of any financial judgment granting a claim, whether rendered in Switzerland or abroad. If the judgment is rendered abroad, it must be recognised subject to exequatur in Switzerland.

If parents neglect to take due care of a child, the court can order their debtors – employers for instance – to make payment in whole or in part to the child’s legal representative (Article 291 of the Civil Code).

Under Swiss law it is a criminal offence not to pay spousal or child maintenance if the debtor has the means to do so, and a complaint is filed (Article 217 of the Criminal Code). The cantonal authorities and agencies, as well as the creditor, can file a complaint.

International Enforcement

If the financial order does not relate to a claim but to other financial rights, for example title on real estate, the matter is governed by the Civil Procedure Code. A Swiss judge can order enforcement measures at the request of the successful party (Article 236.3 of the Civil Procedure Code). If so, the judgment is immediately enforceable (Article 337.1 of the Civil Procedure Code).

If these enforcement measures were not ordered, a request for the performance of the judgment must be presented to the enforcement court (Article 338 of the Civil Procedure Code). The applicant must establish that the requirements for enforcement apply and show the necessary physical records as evidence (Article 338.2 of the Civil Procedure Code).

In international matters, the enforcement of a foreign decision in matrimonial matters may be made under either:

  • international conventions, in particular the Lugano Convention or the Hague Maintenance Convention; or
  • the Federal Act on International Private Law if there is no specific international convention.

Foreign orders are not directly applicable in Switzerland. For example, a foreign order rendered in divorce proceedings abroad ordering a bank to block an account when spouses claim they are entitled to part of the funds deposited with the bank would have no direct effect. If such an order is rendered in a country that is a party to the Lugano Convention, and if the defendant has been heard in the foreign proceedings (or if they have been in a position to appeal abroad the decision), the requesting party can ask for enforcement of the foreign order by a Swiss judge in Switzerland (Article 38 of the New Lugano Convention). However, if the order was rendered in a case between the spouses only, it would require specific additional enforcement measures to be enforceable against the bank in Switzerland.

A foreign order can provide a basis for Swiss interim measures (Article 261 of the Civil Procedure Code), which can be rendered ex parte, provided that:

  • the claimant is likely entitled under the applicable law to the assets to be seized;
  • there is a danger that the assets would disappear; and
  • the foreign court will render a decision enforceable in Switzerland on the merits within a reasonable time.

Family law proceedings are not conducted in public. The ban on public hearings also applies to the media. However, many decisions are accessible on court websites in redacted form, although the family concerned should not be recognisable (Article 54.4 of the Civil Procedure Code).

A settlement hearing is conducted first in contested divorce proceedings (Article 291 of the Civil Procedure Code). At subsequent stages of the legal proceedings, the court will repeatedly attempt to establish agreement between the parties.

Mediation is widespread in Switzerland. By contrast, collaborative legal proceedings are relatively rare. Arbitration proceedings, which in any case can only address the question of marital property settlements in international cases, are not used to resolve marital disputes in Switzerland.

Articles 213 to 218 of the Civil Procedure Code set out preconditions that must apply for the court to recommend that parties subject themselves to mediation.

However, the parties are not under any obligation to subject themselves to mediation before or during divorce proceedings.

Agreements on divorce, children matters (parental rights or alimonies), liquidation of assets or pension funds must all be ratified by a judge.

The courts of the children’s habitual residence are in principle competent to settle disputes relating to children, given that Switzerland applies erga omnes the Hague Convention of 1996.

Proceedings can be initiated by either parent if there is a disagreement between them over custody, parental rights, or financial responsibility for the children. The judge has wide discretionary powers to decide about the children, always in their best interest. He or she is not limited by the parents’ conclusions.

Parental Responsibility

Parental responsibility means the comprehensive right to make all important decisions concerning the child in relation, for example, to education, religious upbringing, and medical interventions. Parental responsibility also includes the right to decide on the child’s place of residence.

Married Parents

Under the revised Law on the Effects of a Parent-Child Relationship, which entered into force on 1 July 2014, a court in Switzerland seized of a divorce petition will assign joint parental responsibility to both parents. Sole parental responsibility in favour of one parent is only exceptionally granted if this is necessary to protect the child’s wellbeing.

Unmarried Parents

If the parents are not married to each other, and the father recognises the child, joint parental responsibility can be established based on a joint declaration by the parents. In case of refusal of one parent, the other can request the Child Protection Authority (Autorité de protection de l'enfant) to intervene. Joint parental authority will be ordered, unless it is clearly and exceptionally contrary to the best interests of the child.

Custody

The judge will decide on the physical custody of a child in the event of the breakdown of a relationship or marriage.

Where there is disagreement between the parents, the court will ask the Youth Protection Service to issue a social report with recommendations.

The same principles are applied when the judge considers the question of awarding custody whether the parents are married or not.

The primary rule for awarding custody is the child’s welfare, and the parent’s interests are relegated to the background.

Among the essential criteria are:

  • the personal relations between parents and child;
  • the parents’ respective educational skills;
  • the parents’ ability to care for the child and to encourage contact with the other parent;
  • the age of the child and their sibling(s) or social circle; and
  • the child’s expressed wish to be cared for by the other parent.

If alternating custody is requested, the judge must examine (independently of the parents’ agreement) whether alternating custody is possible and compatible with the child’s welfare.

Children are heard personally and in an appropriate manner by the judge or a third person appointed for that purpose (generally a representative of the Youth Protection Service). In principle, the hearing can take place from the age of six years. The opinion expressed by the child is generally taken into consideration from the age of eleven or twelve.

Children can ask the judge to appoint their own counsellor, who can submit petitions in the child’s interests.

If the judge concludes that alternating custody is not in the interests of the child, after awarding custody to one of the parents, the judge will determine the right of the other parent to maintain personal relations with the child.

Contact with children and the non-resident parent is granted in consideration of the specific circumstances of each individual case (in particular, the age and development of the child).

In extraordinary circumstances, a right of contact with the child may also be granted to other persons and to relatives, to the extent this serves the child’s best interests (Article 274a of the Civil Code).

Child Maintenance

Maintenance can be provided by caring for and raising the child, or by making monetary payments (Article 276.1 of the Civil Code). The parent with physical custody of the child can ask for financial support to cover the actual costs associated with raising the child (Article 285.1 of the Civil Code). Under Articles 276.2 and 285.2 of the Civil Code, this includes the costs of caring for and raising the child (contribution de prise en charge). This is designed to enable the child to continue being cared for by the parent who primarily took on this responsibility during the marriage or while the parents were living together. The costs are calculated by taking into consideration the essential needs of the caring parent, which are added to the effective costs of the child (TF 5A_329/2019, 5A_102/2019).

In addition, it is possible to claim for the extraordinary costs of the child, for example orthodontics, travel for linguistic education, and so on (Article 286.3 of the Civil Code).

Usually, child maintenance is due monthly. However, a capital payment as full and final settlement of the child’s maintenance entitlement can be considered if this is in the child’s best interests, and must be ratified by the competent authority (Article 288.1 of the Civil Code). While very uncommon in Switzerland, it is also possible to settle a transfer of property as child maintenance, which must also be ratified by a judge.

The above is equally valid for children within a marriage and those born out of wedlock.

Both parents are jointly responsible for supporting a child, irrespective of whether they are married, separated, or divorced. The parent who does not have physical custody of the child must pay for the child’s support (Article 276 of the Civil Code) if he or she has the resources.

When assessing the amount of the maintenance, the following must be considered:

  • the needs of the child and the costs of caring for and raising them; and
  • the parents’ financial situation (income, costs and sometimes wealth) and ability to pay.

(Article 285 of the Civil Code).

The Swiss law does not stipulate a method for calculating child support contributions. However, the case law of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court has recently established a uniform and binding method in Switzerland for child maintenance. The method is called the “concrete two-step method” (ATF 147 III 265).

The first step is to determine the resources and expenses of each member of the family. Expenses are first analysed in a limited way, with only very few expenses being considered (in particular, the minimum amount required to live according to Swiss law, housing rent, basic health insurance). Then, if the family’s financial resources allow it, a second calculation is made of the expenses of each member, adding certain items (taxes, telephone charges, supplementary insurance, training costs). If the family still has a surplus, this is shared between the members (ATF 147 III 265). The judge has a large discretionary power.

Furthermore, it is established that the child should partake in the parents’ standard of living. The court has found that the costs for caring for and raising the child can be included in the maintenance, even in cases of alternate custody.

The parents’ duty to pay child support lasts until the child’s majority (18 years old in Switzerland) but can continue beyond if the child has not completed their education (Article 277 of the Civil Code). However, there is no right for the child to be supported to complete an education abroad if an equivalent course exists in Switzerland.

A child can make a direct claim against their parents. If the child is a minor, they are represented by their legal representative, usually the parent who has the physical custody, or by a guardian (Article 308.2 of the Civil Code).

An agreement on alimonies for a minor child is only binding if ratified by a court.

A child over the age of majority can also make a direct claim against their parents for the payment of alimonies, provided they are pursuing their studies earnestly.

When the parents have different opinions on these issues, but both have the right to decide, one parent asks the judge to give him or her the right to decide alone. In this way, the judge restricts the authority of one parent by giving full decision-making power to the other on the issue in dispute.

Children can be heard by the judge or by a service designed by the judge. From the age of around 11 or 12, children are considered mature enough to express their opinion.

In situations where there is a concern about parental alienation, the judge has the discretion to order a family assessment conducted by one or two psychiatrists.

Finally, a child can always write directly to the judge if needed.

Mediation is widespread in Switzerland. By contrast, collaborative legal proceedings are relatively rare. Arbitration proceedings are not possible for disputes involving children.

Under Article 54.4 of the Civil Procedure Code, family law proceedings are not conducted in public. The ban on public hearings also applies to the media. However, many decisions are accessible on court websites in redacted form, although the family concerned should not be recognisable.

BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy

9 boulevard des Philosophes
1205 Geneva
Switzerland

+41 22 320 12 12

info@brslaw.ch www.brslaw.ch
Author Business Card

Trends and Developments


Authors



BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy is a Geneva-based law firm founded over 35 years ago. The firm’s seven attorneys specialise in various fields of law, with a particular focus on family law matters, including national and international divorce, registered partnerships, prenuptial and postnuptial agreements, international child abduction, splitting of matrimonial estates and occupational pension schemes, medically assisted procreation including surrogacy and its implications in Switzerland, recognition and enforcement of foreign orders and judgments, and family criminal law. BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy is one of the four Swiss firms ranked as a Leading Firm in the Chambers High New Worth Guide. Alain Berger and Marie Berger are fellow members of the IAFL (International Academy of Family Lawyers) and individually ranked in the Chambers High New Worth Guide.

Modernisation of Inheritance Law in the Swiss Federal Act on Private International Law

Introduction

In Switzerland, the Private International Law Act of 18 December 1987 (PILA) governs, in international matters, the jurisdiction of Swiss judicial or administrative authorities, applicable law, and the conditions for the recognition and enforcement of foreign decisions (Article 1 of the PILA).

Chapter 6 of this law, which deals with successions, will be subject to major changes, particularly with regard to the rules of jurisdiction and applicable law, which will be discussed in this article.

The main aim of the legislature is to modernise Swiss private international law and co-ordinate it with developments in foreign international law in this area. In particular, these amendments will reduce the risk of conflicts of jurisdiction with foreign authorities, in particular with the countries of the European Union, by harmonising, at least in part, Swiss law with the European regulation, and will offer testators greater freedom to dispose of their assets.

Readers should note that these amendments have not yet entered into force, as they are subject to a referendum by the Swiss people until 18 April 2024.

Important amendments to the provisions on the international jurisdiction of the Swiss authorities

First amendment: subsidiary competence of the Swiss authorities for Swiss nationals domiciled abroad at the time of their death

Current law

If, at the time of death, the deceased was a Swiss national and domiciled abroad, the Swiss judicial or administrative authorities of the deceased’s place of origin have jurisdiction if the foreign authorities do not deal with the deceased’s estate (Article 87 paragraph 1 of the PILA).

New law

The new article clarifies the term “foreign authorities” to mean “the foreign authorities of the deceased’s place of residence”.

In addition, in order to avoid any positive conflict of jurisdiction, the Swiss authorities may also decline jurisdiction if the following foreign authorities are dealing with the deceased’s estate:

  • the authorities of a foreign national State of the deceased;
  • the authorities of the State of the deceased’s habitual residence; or
  • the authorities of the State where the estate belonging to the deceased is located.

Second amendment: jurisdiction of the Swiss authorities of the deceased’s forum of origin

Current law

The Swiss judicial or administrative authorities of the deceased’s place of origin always have jurisdiction when a Swiss national having his/her last domicile abroad submits, by a will or a contract of inheritance, his/her entire estate or that part of it located in Switzerland to Swiss jurisdiction or law, subject to the exclusive jurisdiction claimed by the State of the place where the real estate is located (Article 87 paragraph 2 of the PILA).

New law

In order to avoid the risks of a positive conflict of jurisdiction arising from the choice of law, the new provision will allow the testator to choose the jurisdiction of the authorities of a State other than the law chosen for his/her succession.

In particular, the testator will have the new option of submitting not only the whole of his/her estate or property to the jurisdiction of the Swiss authorities, but also part of it, such as real estate in Switzerland.

Third amendment: inheritance of a deceased person domiciled abroad with assets in Switzerland

Current law

When the deceased was a foreigner domiciled abroad, the Swiss judicial or administrative authorities have jurisdiction to deal with those parts of the estate that are located in Switzerland insofar as the foreign authorities do not deal with them (Article 88 paragraph 1 of the PILA).

New law

The new article also clarifies the term “foreign authorities” and will refer to the “foreign authorities of the deceased’s place of residence”.

Moreover, in order to avoid positive conflicts of jurisdiction, the Swiss judicial or administrative authorities of the place where the assets are located will now also be able to decline jurisdiction if the following foreign authorities are dealing with the deceased’s estate:

  • the authorities of a foreign national State of the deceased; or
  • the authorities of the State of the deceased’s last habitual residence.

Fourth amendment: conservatory measures for the estate of a deceased person domiciled abroad with assets in Switzerland

Current law

If the deceased had his/her last domicile abroad and left assets in Switzerland, the Swiss authorities of the place where the assets are located shall take the necessary measures for the provisional protection of those assets (Article 89 of the PILA).

New law

In order to avoid internal conflicts of jurisdiction in Switzerland – ie, different cantons having jurisdiction for a single succession, the new provision states that the Swiss authorities have jurisdiction to take the necessary measures for the provisional protection of the deceased’s assets located in Switzerland, only in cases where the Swiss judicial or administrative authorities do not already have jurisdiction over the substance of the dispute.

In addition, the new article removes the requirement that the deceased be domiciled abroad, allowing the Swiss authorities to take protective measures in respect of assets in Switzerland regardless of the deceased’s place of domicile.

This change also addresses a specific issue that arises when the deceased had his/her last domicile in Switzerland, but the Swiss authorities did not have jurisdiction over the succession because of a lis pendens abroad or an extension of jurisdiction in favour of a foreign State of the deceased.

Fifth amendment: litigation

Current law

Where an action with the same subject matter is already pending between the same parties abroad, the Swiss court shall suspend the case if it is foreseeable that the foreign court will, within a reasonable period, render a decision that can be recognised in Switzerland (Article 9 paragraph 1 of the PILA).

New law

In order to avoid any legal uncertainty, and in particular with regard to the proceedings and the settlement of the estate, the legislature has provided for a new article of law stating that Article 9 of the PILA will apply by analogy to the estate as a whole.

This new provision also implicitly states that the initiation of the procedure in Switzerland depends on the filing of a request and not on the opening of the estate through the death of the deceased.

Sixth amendment: election of courts for Swiss and foreign nationals

Current law

The authorities at the place of origin always have jurisdiction when a Swiss citizen, having their last domicile abroad submits, in a will or a contract of succession, their entire estate or the portion thereof located in Switzerland to Swiss jurisdiction or Swiss law, reserving the exclusive jurisdiction claimed by the State in which the real estate is located (Article 87 paragraph 2 of the PILA).

New law

In order to avoid positive conflicts of jurisdiction, a foreign national may also submit his/her succession to the jurisdiction of the authorities of his/her foreign national State by means of a prorogation of jurisdiction, in whole or in part only (partial prorogation of jurisdiction possible). The testator may therefore limit the prorogation of jurisdiction to the assets located in the foreign national State and leave the part of the estate not dealt with by that State to the jurisdiction of the Swiss authorities.

It should be noted that the reservation relating to the exclusive jurisdiction claimed by the State of the location of the buildings is maintained.

For the choice of court to be valid, the testator must have had the nationality of the designated foreign State at the time of disposal or at the time of his/her death.

This amendment will ensure a degree of equality of treatment between Swiss nationals and foreigners and consistency with European regulation, which stipulates that the inheritance of nationals of a Member State falls within the jurisdiction of that State if part of the estate is located on its territory.

Swiss nationals with one or more other nationalities will also have the option of submitting the succession to the jurisdiction of a foreign national State.

In order to avoid a conflict of jurisdiction, the jurisdiction of the Swiss authorities will be excluded if the deceased has, by will or agreement as to succession, submitted immovable property situated abroad to the jurisdiction of the authorities of the State in which the immovable property is situated and insofar as these authorities deal with it. Thus, a Swiss national may submit his/her succession to the jurisdiction of the authorities of his/her national State and make a reservation in favour of the State where the property is located.

Amendments to the provisions relating to applicable law

Seventh amendment: default applicable law

Current law

The succession of a person whose last domicile was in Switzerland is governed by Swiss law (Article 90 paragraph 1 of the PILA).

However, a foreigner may, by will or contract of inheritance, submit his/her succession subject to the law of one of his/her national States. Such choice lapses if, at the time of death, the person making the will no longer had that nationality or had acquired Swiss nationality (Article 90 paragraph 2 of the PILA).

New law

The purpose of the new article of law will be to designate the law applicable to the succession in the absence of a choice of law by the deceased.

It will therefore provide that the succession of a person whose last domicile is abroad is governed by the law designated by the rules of private international law of the State in which the deceased was domiciled. If these rules refer to Swiss private international law, the substantive law of succession of the State of the deceased’s last domicile will apply.

This provision will thus avoid the problems posed by the current Article 91 paragraph 1 of the PILA when the conflict-of-law rules of the State of the foreign domicile do not determine the applicable substantive law, but refer to the conflict-of-law rules of another State, which would be Switzerland, since Switzerland itself refers to the rules of the foreign State.

This new article will also cover cases where there is no valid choice of law and the deceased had his/her last domicile abroad, by providing that if the Swiss authorities of the deceased’s place of origin are competent, then the succession is governed by Swiss law.

Eighth amendment: choice of law and limits under Swiss law

Current law

The succession of a person whose last domicile was abroad is governed by the law designated by the rules of private international law of the State in which the deceased was domiciled (Article 91 of the PILA).

The law does, however, allow Swiss nationals to submit their succession to Swiss law or to the law of the foreign State of their last domicile (Article 87 paragraph 2 cum Article 91 paragraph 2 of the PILA).

Foreign nationals who are not Swiss may elect the law of their country of origin if they were last domiciled in Switzerland. Such submission lapses if, at the time of death, the deceased no longer had such citizenship or had acquired Swiss citizenship (Article 90 paragraph 2 of the PILA).

On the other hand, in the case of the last domicile abroad, the conflict of laws rules of that State determine the possibilities of choice of law (Article 91 paragraph 1 of the PILA).

New law

The new law will settle the question of choice of law and will allow any person to subject his/her succession, by will or contract of inheritance, to the law of one of his/her national States, provided that he/she is a national of that State at the time of disposal or at the time of death.

A Swiss citizen may therefore choose a foreign national law if he/she is a national of that country.

While this provision offers the deceased freedom to choose the law applicable to his/her succession in accordance with the European regulation, including a Swiss person with several nationalities, a limitation will remain since a Swiss person will not be able to derogate from the provisions of Swiss law on the available portion.

On 1 January 2023, the revised Swiss inheritance law came into force to take into account developments in family law, in particular the diversification of family models. It applies with immediate effect to anyone who dies after 31 December 2022, regardless of the date on which a will or contract of inheritance may have been drawn up, and gives testators greater freedom to dispose of their assets.

The first change is to give testators greater freedom to dispose of their assets by reducing the legal reserves. The testator will be able to freely dispose of a greater proportion of his/her assets, and in particular favour his/her spouse or de facto partner. Whereas under the previous law, the testator could only freely dispose of an available portion corresponding to 37.5% of the total estate with descendants and a spouse or registered partner, the new law now allows him/her to freely dispose of 50% in the same situation. Apart from these cases, the deceased may dispose of the entire estate.

The second new feature allows testators to freely dispose of their assets in the event of divorce proceedings or dissolution of a registered partnership. Whereas the previous law on inheritance provided that spouses and registered partners remained each other’s legal and reserved heirs until the divorce or dissolution of the registered partnership came into effect, the new law allows the spouse/registered partner to exclude the other completely from the estate by denying him/her the status of legal and reserved heir in a will, provided however that the pending divorce proceedings relied on a valid ground for divorce (essentially mutual consent or a de facto separation of two years).

Therefore, in order to exclude the surviving spouse from his/her estate before the divorce or dissolution order comes into force, the spouse must mention this in a disposition upon mortis causa (will or inheritance agreement).

The second novelty at international level is that the choice of a foreign national law must be taken into account in cases where the testator had his/her last domicile abroad and the law of that State does not allow this choice of law. The choice of the law of the State of the deceased’s last domicile will only be possible if that State authorises it, and its conflict of law rules must therefore allow it.

The new law also provides that where a Swiss national has submitted his/her succession to the jurisdiction of the Swiss authorities, the succession is presumed to be subject to Swiss law, unless otherwise provided.

A partial choice of law will only be allowed if Swiss law is chosen for assets located in Switzerland and the Swiss authorities have jurisdiction. Their jurisdiction may arise from a choice of court by the testator or from the fact that he/she has not included any clause in his/her choice of law reserving jurisdiction.

Ninth amendment: scope of automatic election

Current law

The law applicable to the succession determines what belongs to the estate, who is entitled to inherit, what share and who is liable for inheritance debts, which legal remedies may be relied on, and which measures may be ordered and under which requirements (Article 92 of the PILA).

Paragraph 2 of this article provides that the implementation of the measures is governed by the law of the State whose authority has jurisdiction. Such law governs, inter alia, conservatory measures and the administration of the estate, including the administration by an executor.

New law

For the sake of clarity, the new wording of paragraph 2 mentions the administration of the estate (but not simple ex officio administration limited to protective measures within the meaning of Article 554 of the Civil Code), in addition to testamentary execution.

The fact that the executor’s or administrator’s power of disposal is governed by the statute of succession – ie, by the law of the place where the succession is opened, will considerably simplify the settlement of the succession in Switzerland and will make it possible to regulate it in a way that reflects practical realities.

Tenth amendment: law applicable to wills and agreements as to succession

Current law

A person is capable of making dispositions of property upon death if, at the time of making the disposition, he/she has the capacity to do so under the law of his/her State of domicile or habitual residence, or under the law of one of his/her national States (Article 94 of the PILA).

The law therefore defines the law applicable to the question of legal capacity to draw up a will or other dispositions mortis causa.

New law

The new law should enable Swiss law to be brought into line with Article 24 of the European Regulation.

According to this article, questions relating to wills will be subject to the law of the domicile of the testator at the time when he/she makes his/her will and no longer to the law of his/her domicile at the time of his/her death.

Furthermore, if in the will in question or an earlier provision, the testator has subjected his/her entire estate – and not just part of it – to the law of one of his/her national States, that law will apply. This rule thus corresponds to the provisions of the European Regulation.

In addition, the new law will allow the testator to make a choice of law, as provided for by the European regulation – ie, to subject the will to the law of one of his/her national States, provided that he/she has the nationality of that State at the time of making the will or at the time of his/her death. Such a choice of law will take precedence over the submission of the succession to the law of another national State.

Eleventh amendment: law applicable to agreements as to succession and other reciprocal dispositions mortis causa

Current law

A contract of inheritance (ie, a contract under Swiss law between the future deceased and the heirs enabling them to agree in advance on the settlement of the estate, in whole or in part) is governed by the law of the State in which the disposing party is domiciled at the time the contract is concluded (Article 95 paragraph 1 of the PILA).

If, in the agreement as to succession, the testator submits his/her entire estate to the law of his/her national State, that law applies instead of the law of domicile (Article 95 paragraph 2 of the PILA).

Other reciprocal dispositions of property upon death are valid if they are in conformity (Article 95 paragraph 3 of the PILA):

  • with the law of residence of each of the disposing party; or
  • with the law of a common national State that they have chosen.

The provisions on form and capacity to dispose are reserved (Article 95 paragraph 4 cum Articles 93 and 94 of the PILA).

New law

Under the new law and in order to comply with European law, the testator may choose the law of one of his/her national States as the law applicable to his/her succession in the contract of succession or in a provision prior to the contract of succession.

It is specified that the testator must submit the whole of the succession (and not just part of it) to the law of one of his/her national States.

With the amendment, the parties will be able to make the agreement as to succession subject to the law of one of the national States of the testator or of one of the testators, or in an agreement as to succession with at least two testators, to the law of the State in which one of them is domiciled at the time the agreement is concluded. For the election of a national law, the testator must have had the nationality of the State in question at the time of the conclusion of the agreement or at the time of the death of the first testator.

BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy

9 boulevard des Philosophes
1205 Geneva
Switzerland

+41 22 320 12 12

info@brslaw.ch www.brslaw.ch
Author Business Card

Law and Practice

Authors



BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy is a Geneva-based law firm founded over 35 years ago. The firm’s seven attorneys specialise in various fields of law, with a particular focus on family law matters, including national and international divorce, registered partnerships, prenuptial and postnuptial agreements, international child abduction, splitting of matrimonial estates and occupational pension schemes, medically assisted procreation including surrogacy and its implications in Switzerland, recognition and enforcement of foreign orders and judgments, and family criminal law. BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy is one of the four Swiss firms ranked as a Leading Firm in the Chambers High New Worth Guide. Alain Berger and Marie Berger are fellow members of the IAFL (International Academy of Family Lawyers) and individually ranked in the Chambers High New Worth Guide.

Trends and Developments

Authors



BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy is a Geneva-based law firm founded over 35 years ago. The firm’s seven attorneys specialise in various fields of law, with a particular focus on family law matters, including national and international divorce, registered partnerships, prenuptial and postnuptial agreements, international child abduction, splitting of matrimonial estates and occupational pension schemes, medically assisted procreation including surrogacy and its implications in Switzerland, recognition and enforcement of foreign orders and judgments, and family criminal law. BRS Berger Recordon & de Saugy is one of the four Swiss firms ranked as a Leading Firm in the Chambers High New Worth Guide. Alain Berger and Marie Berger are fellow members of the IAFL (International Academy of Family Lawyers) and individually ranked in the Chambers High New Worth Guide.

Compare law and practice by selecting locations and topic(s)

{{searchBoxHeader}}

Select Topic(s)

loading ...
{{topic.title}}

Please select at least one chapter and one topic to use the compare functionality.