- The Federal Supreme Court confirms that settlement discussions in civil proceedings are not subject to judicial publicity, as they are not part of the judicial activity of the court.
- Publicity only covers stages of the proceedings that form the basis for a judgment; amicable settlement negotiations primarily serve the parties and contradict the participation of uninvolved third parties.
The BGer has protected the opinion of the Supreme Court and previously of the Labor Court of Zurichthat in civil proceedings conducted Settlement discussions are not subject to the principle of judicial publicitybecause they are not part of the judicial activity of the court. A journalist was therefore rightly excluded from participating in settlement discussions (see also Media release of the BGer).
It is true that
[judicial publicity […] serves to protect the parties directly involved in judicial proceedings with regard to their correct handling and lawful assessment. On the other hand, it also enables third parties not involved in the proceedings to understand how judicial proceedings are conducted, the law is administered and the administration of justice is exercised, and in this respect it is also in the public interest. It aims to ensure transparency in the administration of justice and to create the basis for trust in the judiciary. Democratic control by the legal community is intended to counter speculation that the judiciary unduly disadvantages or privileges individual litigants or that investigations are conducted in a one-sided manner that is questionable in terms of the rule of law […].
It is recognized, however, that the public is exclusively Process sections are accessible, the Basis for the settlement of the dispute by a judgment but not those which, like settlement negotiations, were aimed solely at the amicable settlement of disputes between the parties and whose nature would be contradicted by the presence of uninvolved third parties.
The BGer then states that Settlement talks not a step on the way to a court decision are outside of the proceedings aimed at the adjudication of the dispute and are not part of the adjudicative activity of the court.
It was therefore not objectionable if the higher court did not weigh the interests of the public and those of the parties to the proceedings in relation to the present case.