<p>The new <em>Federal Act on the Transparency of Legal Entities and the Identification of Beneficial Owners </em>(TJPG) and its implementing ordinance (TJPV) will take effect on October 1, 2026. The centerpiece of the legislation is the introduction of a national transparency register, maintained by the Federal Office of Justice. The transparency register will not be publicly accessible. The obligations under the TJPG apply to most Swiss companies as well as certain foreign legal entities and require prompt action – in some cases as early as October 1, 2026.</p>
<h3>1. What Companies Are Affected?</h3>
<p>The TJPG applies to corporations (AGs), limited liability companies (GmbHs), cooperatives, collective investment schemes (SICAVs, SICAFs, KmGKs), and other entities. Trustees who are based in Switzerland or who manage trusts in Switzerland are also subject to the law, unless the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) applies.</p>
<p>The TJPG applies to foreign legal entities if they have a registered branch in Switzerland, if their actual management is located in Switzerland, or if they hold or acquire real estate in Switzerland.</p>
<p><em>Exempt from the TJPG </em>are, among others, associations <em>(Vereine),</em> foundations <em>(Stiftungen)</em>, listed companies (including their subsidiaries if they hold more than 75%), pension funds, and companies that are at least 75% state-owned.</p>
<h3>2. What Specific Steps Must Companies Take?</h3>
<p><strong>2.1 Identification of Beneficial Owners</strong></p>
<p>Companies must proactively identify their beneficial owners. A beneficial owner is any individual who ultimately controls the company by holding, directly or indirectly, alone or in concert with third parties, at least 25% of the capital or voting rights.</p>
<p>The TJPG also covers control «by other means» – for example, through the right to appoint a board majority, to block certain important resolutions, or to influence profit distribution decisions. The ordinance lists a number of control instruments such as shareholder agreements, options, debt instruments, or fiduciary relationships.</p>
<p>If no person meets the control criteria, the highest-ranking member of the company&#8217;s governing body is deemed to be the beneficial owner.</p>
<p>In addition to personal details, the company must determine the nature and extent of control (sole/joint, direct/indirect, ownership stake: 25–50% / &gt;50–75% / &gt;75%). If control is exercised through a control chain involving at least two intermediate entities or a trust, information regarding this control chain or trust must also be obtained.</p>
<p>Companies must request supporting documents from shareholders, beneficial owners, and third parties, and must verify the identity of the beneficial owners with the diligence required by the circumstances; a risk-based approach is permissible.</p>
<p><strong>2.2 Documentation</strong></p>
<p>The information obtained must be documented and retained in such a way that it can be accessed at any time in Switzerland. The retention period is ten years from the date on which a person ceases to be a beneficial owner.</p>
<p><strong>2.3 Reporting to the Transparency Register</strong></p>
<p>Companies must report the identity of their beneficial owners to the transparency register. If a company cannot identify its beneficial owners in a satisfactory way, it must say so and must submit all relevant information available to it, including the name of the highest-ranking member of its governing body.</p>
<p>A simplified procedure applies to certain limited liability companies and single-member corporations. If all beneficial owners are already registered as shareholders or members of a governing body in the commercial register, the company can submit its beneficial ownership report to the commercial register.</p>
<p>Reports must be submitted to the transparency register within one month of the company&#8217;s entry in the commercial register or of its subjection to the TJPG. Changes must be reported within one month of the company becoming aware of them. The highest-ranking member of the company&#8217;s governing body is responsible for submitting the report; delegation is possible, but the responsibility remains with that member.</p>
<p><strong>2.4 Deadlines for Initial Reporting to the Transparency Register</strong></p>
<p>The initial filing with the transparency register must be made within one month after the first change to the commercial register entry occurring after October 1, 2026, but no later than the following dates:</p>
<ul>
<li data-start="1124" data-end="1166">Corporations subject to full audit: January 1, 2027</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li data-start="1204" data-end="1264">Other companies subject to full audit: February 1, 2027</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li data-start="1303" data-end="1345">Corporations not subject to full audit: March 1, 2027</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li data-start="1381" data-end="1453">Other Swiss companies / foreign legal entities: April 1, 2027</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li data-start="1490" data-end="1610">Companies whose beneficial owners are all registered as shareholders or members of governing bodies in the commercial register: October 1, 2028</li>
</ul>
<p>For shareholders who have fulfilled their previous (<em>i.e.,</em> current) obligation to report beneficial owners, the reporting obligation under the TJPG is deemed fulfilled if the reported persons are also considered beneficial owners under the TJPG.</p>
<p>Existing registers of beneficial owners of corporations and limited liability companies must be retained until October 1, 2036. As currently, the supporting documents must be retained for ten years after the person has been removed from the list.</p>
<h3>3. What Must Shareholders Do?</h3>
<p>Shareholders and other company members who, individually or jointly, acquire a controlling interest must report the beneficial owner to the company within one month of the control acquisition. Any changes must also be reported within one month. Upon request by the company, the relevant information and supporting documents must be provided.</p>
<h3>4. What Must Beneficial Owners Do?</h3>
<p>Anyone who becomes a beneficial owner under the TJPG must report this to the shareholder holding the relevant shares or, if control is exercised «by other means» or through a control chain, to the company.</p>
<p>Beneficial owners and third parties involved in the chain of control must cooperate in the identification process and provide the necessary information and supporting documents.</p>
<h3>5. What Penalties Apply for Non-compliance?</h3>
<p>Intentional violations of the reporting obligations (constructive intent is sufficient) by companies, shareholders, and beneficial owners are subject to fines of up to CHF 500,000. The same applies to providing false information to the supervisory body (a section of the Federal Department of Finance that oversees compliance with the TJPG). In case of repeated violations or violations that have not been remedied despite multiple requests, the supervisory body can suspend a shareholder&#8217;s voting and economic rights. The supervisory body can also order the dissolution and liquidation of a legal entity.</p>


Homburger Insights

New Company Transparency Rules: What Needs to be Done?

<h3>Federal Council Proposes to Align Current Rules With the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive</h3>
<p>On June 26, 2024, the Swiss Federal Council opened a consultation process regarding potentially stricter corporate sustainability reporting for Swiss companies. The proposed amendment (the <strong>Draft Amendment</strong>) of articles 964a &#8211; 964c of the Swiss Code of Obligations (<strong>CO</strong>) is intended to bring the current Swiss non-financial matter reporting provisions in line with the EU Directive 2022/2464 of December 14, 2022 on corporate sustainability reporting (Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, <strong>CSRD</strong>). The consultation process lasts until October 31, 2024.</p>
<p>Rather than fully replicate the CSRD, the Federal Council has proposed modifying the existing reporting requirements on non-financial matters under the CO, including by broadening its scope of application, with the effect that more companies will be required to prepare and publish a report on sustainability aspects. According to the Federal Council, whereas the existing reporting obligations affect around 300 companies, the proposed rules would obligate approximately 3,500 companies to report on risks relating to the environment, human rights, and corruption, and the measures they are taking to mitigate these risks.<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">[1]</a></p>
<p>The main changes proposed by the Draft Amendment are summarized in the table under Section A, followed by a more detailed discussion of key aspects of the Draft Amendment.</p>
<h3>A. Overview of Key Changes to the Existing Rules</h3>
<h4>1. Scope:</h4>
<p><img decoding="async" src="https://cms.homburger.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Tabelle-Scope-1.jpg" /></p>
<h4>2. Content:</h4>
<p><img decoding="async" src="https://cms.homburger.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Tabelle-Content-1.jpg" /></p>
<h4>3. Reporting standard:</h4>
<p><img decoding="async" src="https://cms.homburger.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Tabelle-Reporting-1.jpg" /></p>
<h4>4. Audit / assurance requirements:</h4>
<p><img decoding="async" src="https://cms.homburger.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Tabelle-Audit-1.jpg" /></p>
<h4>5. Approval requirements:</h4>
<p><img decoding="async" src="https://cms.homburger.ch/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Tabelle-Approval-1.jpg" /></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<h3>B. Key Aspects of the Draft Amendment</h3>
<h4>1. Extended Scope</h4>
<p>The proposed modified sustainability reporting provisions would apply to the following entities:</p>
<ol>
<li>«Public interest entities» (<em>Gesellschaften des öffentlichen Interesses</em>);</li>
<li>Companies that exceed two of the following figures in two consecutive financial years: (i) total assets of CHF 25 million; (ii) revenue of CHF 50 million; (iii) 250 full-time employee positions per year on average;</li>
<li>Companies obliged to prepare consolidated financial statements and that exceed two of the thresholds in (b) above in two consecutive financial years.</li>
</ol>
<p>As of today, only «public interest entities» with at least 500 full-time equivalents on annual average in two consecutive financial years that exceed either the relevant balance sheet total (CHF 20 million) or revenue threshold (CHF 40 million) in two consecutive financial years are subject to the non-financial matters reporting requirements.</p>
<p>Under the Draft Amendment, «public interest entities» are generally subject to the new reporting requirement, regardless of whether they meet any of the quantitative thresholds described in item (b) above, unless they qualify as an exempted small company (as further described below). In addition, any company, irrespective of whether it qualifies as a «public interest entity», that satisfies two of the three quantitative thresholds described in item (b) above on a standalone or a consolidated basis would also have to establish a sustainability report. The Draft Amendment also contemplates reducing the «full-time equivalents» from 500 to 250.</p>
<p>Companies that would otherwise have to report but are controlled by another company that prepares a Swiss law sustainability report or an equivalent report under foreign law are exempt. Also exempt are small companies that alone or together with domestic or foreign companies that they control do not exceed two of the applicable thresholds (viz. total assets of CHF 450,000, sales revenue of CHF 900,000, 10 full-time employees on annual average in two consecutive years).</p>
<h4>2. Annual Sustainability Report: Format</h4>
<p>Companies subject to the Draft Amendment would continue to be obliged to produce an annual sustainability report. The annual sustainability report may be prepared as a separate report or, in alignment with the CSRD, it may be integrated into the management report pursuant to article 961c CO. The report must be in an electronic reporting format established in accordance with an internationally recognized standard, namely the one used by the EU member states.</p>
<h4>3. Reporting Requirements</h4>
<p>Compared to the existing non-financial matter reporting, the Draft Amendment further expands and specifies the scope of the information on sustainability. The current law&#8217;s terminology would largely be replaced with new terms that have a similar meaning. The information to be reported on is described as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>Environmental factors (<em>e.g.</em>, climate protection &#8211; including greenhouse gas emissions, water and marine resources, resource utilization and the circular economy, soil, water, and air pollution, and biodiversity and ecosystems &#8211; as well as human health and safety and the use of renewable and non-renewable energy, including exposure to coal and oil-and gas-related activities);</li>
<li>Social aspects, including employee matters (<em>e.g.</em>, measures to protect various interest groups (such as shareholders, employees, and customers), working conditions, diversity, measures against violence and harassment, disability accommodations, and work-life balance);</li>
<li>Human rights aspects; and</li>
<li>Governance aspects (<em>e.g.</em>, the role of the board of directors and management in respect of sustainability aspects, the strategy for linking incentives for board and management members to sustainability aspects, internal controls and risk management systems related to sustainability, policies and measures to combat corruption).</li>
</ul>
<p>In line with the reporting requirements under the Federal Ordinance on Reporting on Climate of November 23, 2022, which became effective on January 1, 2024, the Draft Amendment requires in-scope companies to report on the statues regarding achieving the net-zero greenhouse gas emissions target by 2050 to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. This will include reporting on Scope 1, Scope 2 and, where applicable, Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with the current GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard.</p>
<p>The Draft Amendment would also expressly require reporting on governance matters, beyond reporting on the combat of corruption.</p>
<p>Like the existing law, the Draft Amendment continues to list specific sustainability aspects that must be described in the report in more detail, such as the company&#8217;s business model and strategy, applied due diligence processes in respect of sustainability aspects, material risks the company faces with respect to sustainability aspects or material financial, and non-financial performance indicators. However, the list included in the Draft Amendment adds new items, such as a description of the time-bound sustainability targets that the company has set itself, a description of the role of the board of directors in relation to sustainability, or information on any incentive systems linked to sustainability that are offered to directors and executives.</p>
<p>The most significant change to current non-financial matter reporting is that all information must be provided in compliance with the standards used in the EU (<em>i.e.</em>, the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS)) or another equivalent standard for sustainability reporting (the explanatory report also mentions the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards or the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) as examples). The selected standard must be adopted in its entirety. The Federal Council will designate the standards that are equivalent to the ESRS in an ordinance.</p>
<p>Under the Draft Amendment, the applicable standard will be determined by the board of directors; however, the standard may also be determined based on a shareholder vote at a general meeting.</p>
<p>Further information regarding the specific reporting matters is available in the Federal Council&#8217;s related explanatory report.<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">[1]</a></p>
<h4>4. Double Materiality Principle</h4>
<p>The Draft Amendment clearly establishes the principle of «dual materiality» in line with the CSRD. The sustainability report must therefore disclose the information necessary to understand the impact of the company&#8217;s activities on sustainability issues and the impact of sustainability issues on the company&#8217;s business, financial performance, and position.</p>
<p>In contrast with the current law, in which the principle of «double materiality» already applies, the proposed draft seeks to clarify that, in accordance with EU law, information must be disclosed that is material under both aspects as well as information that is material under only one aspect.</p>
<h4>5. «Comply or Explain»</h4>
<p>The option available under the current law to waive reporting on certain sustainability topics under certain conditions («comply or explain») would no longer be available under the Draft Amendment. The «comply or explain» approach is also not available under the CSRD framework.</p>
<h4>6. New Auditing and Assurance Requirements</h4>
<p>The current law does not impose any audit or assurance requirements on the reporting of non-financial matters. By contrast, under the Draft Amendment, the sustainability information included in the report must be made subject to assurance. Either independent audit firms<a href="#_ftn2" name="_ftnref2">[2]</a> or conformity assessment bodies (<em>Prüfgesellschaft</em>) may provide assurance.</p>
<p>The Federal Council will determine, taking into account international developments, including EU law, whether any assurances from audit or conformity assessment bodies should take the form of a «positive» / reasonable assurance or a «negative» / limited assurance. The EU contemplates introducing a positive reasonable assurance requirement by October 1, 2028.</p>
<p>In addition, in respect of companies subject to an ordinary audit pursuant to article 728a CO, the Draft Amendment would require the statutory auditor to conduct an audit on whether there are material inconsistencies between the information in the sustainability report and the audited standalone and consolidated financial statements. This audit review does not include a material audit of the accuracy of completeness of the information published in the sustainability report.</p>
<h4>7. Shareholder Vote</h4>
<p>The Draft Amendment maintains the requirement that the sustainability report be approved by shareholders at each annual general meeting. The CSRD does not require shareholder approval of sustainability reports. The explanatory report to the Draft Amendment expressly states that the shareholder vote on the sustainability report is binding, and not advisory, contrary to the currently prevailing practice under the existing law.<a href="#_ftn3" name="_ftnref3">[3]</a></p>
<h4>8. Criminal Law Provisions</h4>
<p>The criminal law sanctions for an inaccurate or incomplete report remain unchanged in substance. A fine of up to CHF 100,000 will be imposed on anyone who intentionally makes false statements in the reports, fails to make the required reports, or fails to comply with the legal obligation to keep and store the report.</p>
<h4>9. Timeline</h4>
<p>The Federal Council will determine the date on which the new provisions become effective. Companies will then have two years to adapt to the new law. During this two-year transition period, the current law will apply.</p>
<h6><a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">[1]</a>   <em>See </em>Federal Council, «Änderung des Obligationenrechts (Transparenz über Nachhaltigkeitsaspekte): Erläuternder Bericht zur Eröffnung des Vernehmlassungsverfahrens», 25-33 (<em>available at </em><a href="https://www.newsd.admin.ch/newsd/message/attachments/88435.pdf">https://www.newsd.admin.ch/newsd/message/attachments/88435.pdf</a>).</h6>
<h6><a href="#_ftnref2" name="_ftn2">[2]</a>   Pursuant to article 6a of the Auditor Oversight Act of December 16, 2005</h6>
<h6><a href="#_ftnref3" name="_ftn3">[3]</a>   <em>See </em>Federal Council, «Änderung des Obligationenrechts . . .» at 36-37.</h6>
<h6><a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">[1]</a>   <em>See </em>Federal Council, &#171;Nachhaltige Unternehmensführung: Bundesrat schlägt strengere Regeln für Berichterstattung vor&#187; (June 26, 2024), <em>available at </em><a href="https://www.admin.ch/gov/de/start/dokumentation/medienmitteilungen.msg-id-101585.html">https://www.admin.ch/gov/de/start/dokumentation/medienmitteilungen.msg-id-101585.html</a>.</h6>
<p>&nbsp;</p>


Homburger_Illu_ZPO_BH_Preview_2020_10 (2)

Swiss Corporate Sustainability Reporting

<h3>Implications for Swiss Companies</h3>
<p>On May 24, 2024, the Council of the EU adopted the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. The Directive, which is part of the EU&#8217;s transition to a climate-neutral and green economy, lays down rules to ensure that companies operating in the EU respect human rights and the environment throughout their operations and value chains.</p>
<p>The Directive represents a significant shift in the EU regulatory framework on sustainable corporate governance, and will have a substantial impact on Swiss companies that operate in the EU market or that are part of a group that does. We summarize the Directive&#8217;s main features and highlight the implications for affected Swiss companies.</p>
<h3>A. Scope</h3>
<p>The Directive applies extraterritorially to non-EU companies with annual net turnover exceeding €450 million in the EU (or the ultimate parent company of a group that reaches this threshold). It also covers EU and non-EU franchisors and licensors (or the ultimate parent company of a group) with annual royalties over €22.5 million and a net EU turnover exceeding €80 million.</p>
<p>Additionally, Swiss companies not directly covered may also be impacted indirectly as business partners of upstream or downstream in-scope entities.<a href="#_ftn1" name="_ftnref1">[1]</a> In-scope financial institutions, for example, are required to conduct due diligence on their own operations and upstream business partners, such as investors, but not downstream business partners, such as borrowers.</p>
<p>Swiss companies that fall within these categories, are part of a group that does, or do business with in-scope entities, will be, directly or indirectly, subject to the Directive&#8217;s obligations.</p>
<h3>B. Obligations</h3>
<p>In-scope companies must integrate risk-based due diligence into their policies and risk management systems, covering both human rights and environmental impacts. These obligations are more detailed than and go beyond the due diligence obligations in the Swiss Ordinance on Due Diligence and Transparency, which are limited to child labor and certain minerals and metals.</p>
<p>The core due diligence obligations in the Directive include identifying and assessing actual and potential adverse human rights and environmental impacts, preventing and mitigating these impacts, monitoring effectiveness, and providing remediation.</p>
<p>In addition, in-scope companies must implement a climate transition plan, aligned with the Paris Agreement&#8217;s goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C, and including time-bound and science-based targets for 2030 and five-year steps up to 2050. Companies must develop actions to achieve these targets and update their transition plans annually.</p>
<p>The Directive also requires companies to communicate publicly regarding their due diligence efforts, with annual statements on their websites, and to engage with stakeholders, establish a notification mechanism and complaints procedure, and monitor the effectiveness of their due diligence measures.</p>
<h3>C. Penalties for Non-compliance</h3>
<p>Member States will impose pecuniary and non-pecuniary penalties for breaches. Maximum fines shall be not less than 5 percent of net worldwide turnover in the preceding financial year. Non-compliant companies may also be barred from participating in public contracts and tenders, and authorities may publicly «name and shame» companies that fail to meet due diligence obligations.</p>
<p>Companies may also be liable for civil damages if their failure to conduct proper due diligence harms people or the environment. This reverses the typical burden of proof in favor of claimants, who may be individuals, groups, or organizations affected by the adverse impacts. The statute of limitations for such civil claims is five years, or not lower than the minimum period under national regimes for general civil liability.</p>
<h3>D. Compliance Timeline</h3>
<p>The Directive will enter into force twenty days after its official publication in the EU&#8217;s Official Journal, after which Member States will have two years to transpose the Directive into national laws.</p>
<p>For in-scope non-EU companies, compliance and reporting obligations will phase in depending on size and turnover. For those with annual net EU turnover exceeding €1.5 billion, compliance will begin three years after entry into force (2027); more than €900 million, after four years (2028); more than €450 million, after five years (2029).</p>
<h3>E. Next Steps</h3>
<p>Swiss companies potentially within the Directive&#8217;s scope should assess their current policies and practices against the Directive&#8217;s requirements and prepare to implement the necessary due diligence measures and transition plans. All Swiss companies should evaluate their role in the value chain of in-scope companies and anticipate potential requests for information or cooperation from their business partners.</p>
<p>Swiss companies should also monitor the development and implementation of the Directive&#8217;s requirements and further guidance from the EU, as well as the possible further development of due diligence legislation in Switzerland.</p>
<h6><a href="#_ftnref1" name="_ftn1">[1]</a> In-scope EU entities include companies formed under the laws of a Member State that have over 1,000 employees on average during the course of a financial year and an annual net worldwide turnover exceeding €450 million.</h6>


Homburger_Illu_DatentransferUSA_Preview_2020_09_V2

EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive 

Corporate / M&A

IP / IT

Corporate Governance

Data Protection

Homburger News

Homburger advised the shareholders of Evax AG on the sale to Boehringer Ingelheim

<p>On July 24, 2026, Boehringer Ingelheim acquired Evax AG, a Swiss biotech company focused on equine health. Founded more than a decade ago at the University of Zurich, Evax has been exploring the use of therapeutic vaccines to address significant unmet needs in horses, particularly for the treatment of allergic skin diseases.</p>
<p>Homburger acted as legal counsel to Evax AG.</p>
<p>The Homburger team advising the shareholders of Evax AG was co-led by Luca Dal Molin (IP/IT) and Karin Mattle (Corporate/M&amp;A) and included Florian Bruggisser, Matteo Gasser (both Corporate/M&amp;A), Reto Heuberger and Philippe Weber (both Tax), as well as Philippe Baumann (IP/IT).</p>


Litigation

Healthcare / Life Sciences

Sandoz

Homburger represented Sandoz in Federal Patent Court cross-border preliminary injunction proceeding over aflibercept biosimilar Afqlir®

<p>Homburger successfully represented Sandoz Group AG, Sandoz AG and Sandoz Pharmaceuticals AG in a landmark preliminary injunction proceeding before the Swiss Federal Patent Court (FPC), defeating claims brought by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Bayer in connection with Sandoz’s aflibercept biosimilar Afqlir®.</p>
<p>Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Bayer had invoked European Patent EP 2 364 691 B1 – a formulation patent – to seek injunctive relief against Sandoz, not only in Switzerland but across 19 additional European jurisdictions.</p>
<p>The FPC dismissed the requests in their entirety, holding that Afqlir® does not infringe the patent, neither literally nor under the doctrine of equivalents.</p>
<p>The decision is significant in several respects, including the following:</p>
<p>First application of the doctrine of equivalents to multiple interdependent claim substitutions. Afqlir® departs from the asserted patent claims in several interrelated formulation features simultaneously. In a novel analytical step, the FPC declined to assess each substitution in isolation and instead applied the three-question Pemetrexed equivalence test to the totality of the bundled differences. The Court concluded that a skilled person would have no reasonable expectation that the substituted features, taken in combination, achieve the same effect as the claimed feature combination. This is understood to be the first Swiss decision in which the second question of the equivalence test – foreseeability of the same effect – proved decisive, and in which equivalence was denied precisely because of the interdependence of multiple differing features.</p>
<p>First-ever cross-border preliminary injunction case in Switzerland. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Bayer sought to obtain, in a single Swiss proceeding, injunctive relief covering not only Switzerland but the national parts of the asserted European patent in 19 further European countries – a scope of relief never before attempted in Switzerland. Drawing on the CJEU’s rulings in Solvay/Honeywell (C-616/10) and BSH/Electrolux (C-339/22), the FPC accepted jurisdiction to assess infringement across all 20 countries, relying on the uniform application of Article 69 EPC and its Protocol across EPC contracting states. Because infringement was denied, the FPC fully dismissed Regeneron Pharmaceuticals’ and Bayer’s requests.</p>
<p>The FPC’s decision of July 17, 2026 (case no. S2025_003) is available on the FPC’s website (www.bundespatentgericht.ch).</p>
<p>The Homburger team was led by Andri Hess and included Julian Schwaller (both IP / IT).</p>


Marriott International

Homburger advises Marriott International on its proposed joint venture with the Leali family, founders of the Lefay brand

<p>On March 31, 2026, Marriott International (Nasdaq: MAR) and the Leali family, founders of Lefay, announced their plans to enter into a joint venture to bring the highly awarded luxury wellness hospitality brand Lefay into the Marriott portfolio. Completion of the transaction is subject to customary approvals and closing conditions.</p>
<p>Lefay will be the first brand in Marriott’s portfolio dedicated exclusively to luxury wellness. The Lefay portfolio includes two award-winning luxury resorts in Italy (Lago di Garda and Dolomiti), and a further three properties are under development in Tuscany, Southern Italy, and the Swiss Alps.</p>
<p>The Homburger team advising Marriott on all Swiss law aspects of the transaction comprises Margrit Marti, Tobias Gloor and Florian Gasche (all Corporate / M&amp;A) as well as Reto Heuberger, Arbnor Sheholli and Alessandra Dumitru (all Tax).</p>


Corporate Governance

Main Contacts

New Company Transparency Rules: What Needs to be Done?

Swiss Corporate Sustainability Reporting

EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive

Homburger advised the shareholders of Evax AG on the sale to Boehringer Ingelheim

Homburger represented Sandoz in Federal Patent Court cross-border preliminary injunction proceeding over aflibercept biosimilar Afqlir®

Homburger advises Marriott International on its proposed joint venture with the Leali family, founders of the Lefay brand

Corporate Governance and Directors’ Duties in Switzerland: Overview 2025

Neue Aufsichtsinstrumente der FINMA –Vorschläge des Bundesrats

Corporate governance and directors' duties in Switzerland: Overview 2024 / 2025