Swisslife Pension Plan
In September 2020, after more than three years of proceedings, the Princely Court of Justice sentenced SwissLife (Liechtenstein) AG in a further judgment to pay compensation for all losses and disadvantages in connection with the complex overall investment product sold by the company.
The complex overall investment product designed and sold by the legal predecessor Capital Leben consisted of a pension insurance policy from Capital Leben (now SwissLife), a foreign currency loan from a bank and various repayment vehicles from other providers.
The court concluded that the overall investment product conceived and sold by the defendant was designed in such a way that only under optimal conditions was there a small chance of exiting without losses and achieving a black zero.
The court also took the view that no reasonable person would take out this product with such a risk/reward ratio.
Finally, the court also made it clear that the interrelationships and design of the overall investment product were so complex that even the court could not adequately grasp them without an expert.
The court granted the plaintiff’s request for rescission of the contract in full and ordered SwissLife (Liechtenstein) AG to reimburse all loan liabilities incurred by the plaintiff as a result of taking out the foreign currency loan. On the other hand, the court awarded the plaintiff compensation for all of the own funds he had spent, including the development in value. In total, the court awarded the plaintiff over CHF 450,000. The court also ordered the defendant to reimburse the plaintiff for all legal costs incurred.
The court also clarified that the claims asserted by the plaintiff could not be time-barred, even though more than 15 years had passed between the conclusion of the overall investment product and the filing of the lawsuit. The court took the view that the product designed by the defendant was so complex that only an expert opinion made it clear that it was already defective at the root and that the probability of getting out without losses was extremely low.
The decision not only confirms and substantiates the previous case law obtained by our law firm on liability for all losses arising from total investment products. It also confirms the case law of the Supreme Court that, in the case of complex investment products, the limitation period for claims only begins when an expert opinion is available from which the defects of the product and the resulting incorrect advice become apparent. Only then does the investor actually have knowledge of the damage, the injuring party and the required causal link.
The decision of the Princely Court of Justice therefore shows that all investors who concluded this overall investment product can still claim all their losses from the overall investment product today. As the court has qualified the overall investment product as unsuitable, the prospects of successfully asserting the claims for all other investors can be considered very good.
Our law firm acted as counsel in the case. The decision of the Princely Court of Justice is not yet final.
10 | 2020