LegaFund Insights
Insights
Research, legal finance, and private capital perspectives with Swiss institutional rigor.
What the numbers show: payment orders and bankruptcies in Switzerland (1994/1995–2024)
BFS time series show a clear rise in formal enforcement. We highlight the 2024 YoY changes and the longer-term trend — and explain what you can (and cannot) infer from the data.
Prescription periods for retrocession claims: source-limited note
The source does not provide a prescription-period analysis. This source-limited note explains what Abegglen does cover instead: retroactive waivers, time-layered disclosure, client inquiry expectations and the annualised disclosure architecture.
Inkasso, debt enforcement and bankruptcy: the Swiss process in one overview
What happens between an unpaid invoice and formal enforcement? This post explains the key terms (payment order, objection, seizure, realisation, bankruptcy) and why process clarity reduces friction.
When is a retrocession waiver valid? Consent requirements under Swiss case law
What makes a retrocession waiver effective under current case law? We distil Abegglen’s summary of required disclosure elements, the meaning of ‘Eckwerte’, the acceptance of bandwidth-based disclosure, and practical implications for AGB and repapering.
Debt collection (Inkasso) in Switzerland: why it matters — and why it is not a taboo
Debt collection is not about stigma or pressure; it is about fair, documented processes that prevent escalation. Using BFS data (1994/1995–2024), we show why professional claims management matters for businesses and households.
Retrocessions case law: Swiss Federal Supreme Court timeline and consequences
From the first landmark ruling (2006) through the informed-waiver doctrine (2011) to the 2024 clarifications on ‘Eckwerte’, industry-standard disclosure and retroactive AGB waivers—this timeline summarises what the Federal Supreme Court has decided and what remains open.
Retrocessions under Swiss law: legal foundations
Art. 400 CO is the doctrinal anchor for retrocession surrender duties. This post explains the ‘inner connection’ test, the conflict-of-interest rationale, and how relationship type (wealth management, advice, execution-only, custody) drives the analysis.