FINMA pushed Sudan (SR 946.231.18), Taliban (SR 946.231.07), and ISIL/Al-Qaida (SR 946.231.08) list updates through the same notification window this week. Three regimes, three legal bases, one afternoon to process them all. Sudan runs on an autonomous Swiss mandate with no EU anchor — the structural consequence of that is unpacked in today's piece by Dr. von Tatzenberg. The ISIL/Al-Qaida list tracks the UN Security Committee directly, which creates a different compliance clock from EU-anchored regimes; that logic gets its own analysis today. Screening teams have the same system-update deadline for all three, but the escalation procedure differs by source authority — a distinction that matters when the update arrives on a Friday afternoon.

Alain Girard moves from Recovery & Resolution to lead FINMA's Banks division. The career path is the message: embedding a resolution specialist in the supervisory line means FINMA's post-Credit Suisse operational memory now sits where it shapes day-to-day examination intensity, not where it waits for the next crisis. The appointment was announced in February; the examination cycle where that background starts to show itself is underway now. Casimir von Firn has the full analysis today, including what the TBTF revision cycle looks like under a division head who has run resolution scenarios.

Civil society is pushing for cobalt to be written into Switzerland's responsible business legislation before the NUFG consultation closes. The more immediate compliance pressure doesn't wait for Swiss law to move: the CSDDD already binds Swiss exporters contractually through their EU customer agreements, today. Dr. von Tatzenberg maps the gap today — specifically where the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Mineral Supply Chains leaves cobalt in an operational lacuna and how the CSDDD bridge crosses it before any Swiss statute does. The reporting obligation under Art. 964b OR sits in parallel and doesn't move with the referendum calendar.

A data subject invoking DSG Art. 25 to request account-level information from a bank puts the institution between two contradictory statutory obligations: data protection law says disclose, banking secrecy says don't. The collision was theoretical until supervised institutions started receiving requests that explicitly probe the boundary. Dr. von Tatzenberg works through the priority rules today — the resolution is neither clean nor obvious, and getting it wrong in either direction brings a different regulator down on you. Worth putting the data protection officer and banking compliance lead in the same room before the first request arrives, not after.

SWI swissinfo.ch's background piece on Russian oligarch billions frozen in Swiss banks gives the public-facing numbers. The structural problem underneath is what Dr. von Tatzenberg unpacks today: Switzerland's SRVG freezing mechanism operates on the nominal account holder. Layered ownership through nominees, foundations, or holding structures falls outside the freeze unless the investigation pierces to the actual beneficial owner — and the investigative tools for that are not automatic. Today's Magnitsky piece adds the second problem: even assets that are frozen don't automatically convert into restitution. Two separate gaps, one political pressure point that isn't going away.

The Grand Chamber ruled in Meta Platforms Ireland (C-797/23) that EU member states may provide press publishers with a right to fair compensation when platforms use their publications — the case involved aggregation, with clear implications for AI training use of press content. The ruling doesn't mandate compensation; it confirms Directive 2019/790 leaves space for national legislation to go further. For in-house counsel: AI content licensing agreements that include press publication carve-outs are now being written into a confirmed legal landscape. Agreements that left the question open may need reviewing. For Swiss media subsidiaries in EU jurisdictions, the national implementation gap now has a judicial floor and the litigation is just starting.

The Federal Act on Electronic Identity is not a future planning item — it's a present obligation that changes the evidentiary standard for identity verification at onboarding. Casimir von Firn's piece today maps the practical delta: which KYC steps the state-issued eID can substitute, where the residual document obligation survives, and what the institution needs in its file to demonstrate it accepted the eID in good faith. The gap between institutions that update onboarding procedures now and those that wait will show up in the first examination cycle that includes eID-based client files.

US-form contracts routinely cap liability at a multiple of fees paid and exclude consequential damages entirely. Swiss courts do not enforce these automatically. OR Art. 100 prohibits pre-excluding liability for gross negligence or intentional conduct, full stop, regardless of the governing-law clause — and the Swiss proportionality standard applies to everything else. Casimir von Firn works through the test today. For in-house teams approving US-form agreements with Swiss counterparties or Swiss-domiciled performance obligations: the clause your New York team drafted will not hold in a Zurich court, and the US team that drafted it doesn't know that. This is one for your Swiss counsel before signature, not for the dispute team after breach.

The ECJ found that Italy's system of successive fixed-term contracts for university staff violates Directive 1999/70/EC's Framework Agreement on fixed-term work. The operative principle extends beyond the public sector in which this case arose: national law cannot systematically deny permanent status through structural reliance on fixed-term renewals. Casimir von Firn translates the ruling for Swiss parent companies with EU subsidiaries today. The question to put to your HR team is not whether you use fixed-term contracts in Italy or any other EU jurisdiction — it's whether the renewal pattern would survive scrutiny under the framework agreement standard. A simple contract count by subsidiary is a reasonable first step.

Baker McKenzie is not piloting Legora — it is deploying it globally across all six practice groups simultaneously. The distinction is the signal. For two years the BigLaw conversation was about which platforms were being tested. That conversation is now about which platforms are becoming infrastructure. For in-house counsel benchmarking external advisers: AI capability at panel firms is moving past the "we have a tool" stage to the "the tool is the default workflow" stage. The billing conversation about AI efficiency gains — how much time was cut, how is that reflected in the invoice — will arrive before most GCs have had the internal policy discussion about how to respond to it.

The UK Supreme Court's 2023 PACCAR ruling held that many litigation funding agreements constitute damages-based agreements requiring specific regulatory authorization. The government promised corrective legislation. It has not arrived. Funders describe themselves as "deeply disappointed." The practical exposure: UK funding arrangements entered into since July 2023 may be unenforceable without restructuring. For Swiss companies with UK litigation funded by third parties — or contemplating it — the enforceability risk on the funding agreement is a due-diligence item that is now two years old and unresolved. Worth flagging to your UK litigation team before the next matter is funded, not when it settles.

AlixPartners' 2026 disputes forecast puts cybersecurity and AI risk at the top of US corporate litigation concern — the same professional instinct is visible in Swiss enforcement trends. Casimir von Firn maps the growth in Swiss bribery prosecutions today and where the enforcement gaps remain. The companion piece — the Rolex test — operationalizes the analysis: at what point does a business courtesy to a foreign official cross the threshold of StGB Art. 322septies? Both pieces belong in front of the compliance training lead before the next hospitality policy review. The rule-of-law-as-enterprise-risk framing that Dr. von Tatzenberg develops today is the strategic envelope around both.