Type of refusal
Refusal to disclose with a counterparty in Switzerland
The counterparty refusing disclosure is usually a fund vehicle, a nominee, or an intermediary holding assets on behalf of others. What can be established before any Swiss procedure starts is who that entity actually is and where its assets sit. See the broader pattern across other refusal-to-disclose cases for how this type of dispute typically opens.
Who is actually on the other side
The entity refusing disclosure is rarely a natural person. It is typically a company, a fund structure, or a trustee holding investor assets under a mandate. Switzerland's commercial register shows registered seat, legal form, and signatories, but not solvency, and not whether assets described in earlier reports remain where they were placed. If a foreign holding sits above the Swiss entity, the register only shows the Swiss layer. Which body can compel disclosure in a given dispute depends on the applicable procedural rule. Background on the jurisdiction is set out in the Switzerland overview; other O6 cases are indexed in the insights on refusal to disclose.
What to secure before the counterparty reacts
Before the counterparty reacts, preserve everything proving the investment was made and what was promised: subscription documents, payment confirmations, and correspondence where disclosure was requested and refused. Save statements, NAV reports, or portal screenshots with dates, stored somewhere the counterparty does not control, particularly if the relationship runs through a platform account rather than a direct holding. Record every entity name and jurisdiction that appears in correspondence, even ones that seem tangential. A related account of how disclosure gets refused inside fund structures is set out in this note on fund-structure refusals. This record is the basis a later claim would be built on.
Where a judgment would have to be enforced
Switzerland is not a party to the Hague 2019 Judgments Convention; recognition here cannot rely on it. For a judgment from an EU or EFTA state, the Lugano Convention applies instead of Brussels Ia. For any other origin, the sequence for presenting an enforcement request is established from the case file, not set out here. Foreign documents generally need an apostille; Switzerland holds a reservation on position 6 of the Apostille Convention, in force since 11 March 1973. The competent authority is determined by the applicable procedural rule. A worked example is at enforcement from the UAE to Switzerland; general mechanics are at enforcement into Switzerland. This firm does not charge on a result-only basis, and its registration can be checked via the guide to verifying a law firm.