19. August 2021 – In this decision, the Federal Supreme Court had to assess whether the costs for the search of her practice by the Department of Consumer and Veterinary Affairs of the Canton of Jura were lawfully imposed on the appellant, who was a self-employed non-medical practitioner and mycotherapist. On suspicion of unlawful practices, a search was carried out at the appellant's premises, whereupon violations of food law were found (e.g. improper labelling of products) and products - i.e. boxes of mushroom powder capsules - were confiscated. However, the subject matter of the dispute before the Federal Supreme Court ultimately concerned the appellant's obligation to register its practice with the Office of Consumer Protection as a food distribution centre (cf. art. 11 para. 2 of the Federal Act on Foodstuffs and Utility Articles, FSA). In particular, the appellant complained to the Federal Supreme Court that the seized boxes of powdered mushroom capsules were intended for her personal use and that the storage of these products was therefore not covered by the FSA.

After a thorough examination, the court ruled that the criterion of private domestic use must be interpreted restrictively. Due to the large amount of products found and contradictory statements made by the appellant, the court found that the appellant's argument could not be accepted. The appellant should have reported her activity to the cantonal enforcement authority accordingly. The appeal was consequently dismissed.

For more information, see here.