-
- Art. 3 FC
- Art. 5a FC
- Art. 6 FC
- Art. 10 FC
- Art. 13 FC
- Art. 16 FC
- Art. 17 FC
- Art. 20 FC
- Art. 22 FC
- Art. 26 FC
- Art. 29a FC
- Art. 30 FC
- Art. 31 FC
- Art. 32 FC
- Art. 42 FC
- Art. 43 FC
- Art. 43a FC
- Art. 45 FC
- Art. 55 FC
- Art. 56 FC
- Art. 60 FC
- Art. 68 FC
- Art. 74 FC
- Art. 75b FC
- Art. 77 FC
- Art. 81 FC
- Art. 96 para. 1 FC
- Art. 96 para. 2 lit. a FC
- Art. 110 FC
- Art. 117a FC
- Art. 118 FC
- Art. 123a FC
- Art. 123b FC
- Art. 130 FC
- Art. 136 FC
- Art. 164 FC
- Art. 166 FC
- Art. 170 FC
- Art. 178 FC
- Art. 189 FC
- Art. 191 FC
-
- Art. 11 CO
- Art. 12 CO
- Art. 50 CO
- Art. 51 CO
- Art. 84 CO
- Art. 97 CO
- Art. 98 CO
- Art. 99 CO
- Art. 100 CO
- Art. 143 CO
- Art. 144 CO
- Art. 145 CO
- Art. 146 CO
- Art. 147 CO
- Art. 148 CO
- Art. 149 CO
- Art. 150 CO
- Art. 633 CO
- Art. 701 CO
- Art. 713 CO
- Art. 715 CO
- Art. 715a CO
- Art. 734f CO
- Art. 785 CO
- Art. 786 CO
- Art. 787 CO
- Art. 788 CO
- Art. 808c CO
- Transitional provisions to the revision of the Stock Corporation Act of June 19, 2020
-
- Art. 2 PRA
- Art. 3 PRA
- Art. 4 PRA
- Art. 6 PRA
- Art. 10 PRA
- Art. 10a PRA
- Art. 11 PRA
- Art. 12 PRA
- Art. 13 PRA
- Art. 14 PRA
- Art. 15 PRA
- Art. 16 PRA
- Art. 17 PRA
- Art. 19 PRA
- Art. 20 PRA
- Art. 21 PRA
- Art. 22 PRA
- Art. 23 PRA
- Art. 24 PRA
- Art. 25 PRA
- Art. 26 PRA
- Art. 27 PRA
- Art. 29 PRA
- Art. 30 PRA
- Art. 31 PRA
- Art. 32 PRA
- Art. 32a PRA
- Art. 33 PRA
- Art. 34 PRA
- Art. 35 PRA
- Art. 36 PRA
- Art. 37 PRA
- Art. 38 PRA
- Art. 39 PRA
- Art. 40 PRA
- Art. 41 PRA
- Art. 42 PRA
- Art. 43 PRA
- Art. 44 PRA
- Art. 45 PRA
- Art. 46 PRA
- Art. 47 PRA
- Art. 48 PRA
- Art. 49 PRA
- Art. 50 PRA
- Art. 51 PRA
- Art. 52 PRA
- Art. 53 PRA
- Art. 54 PRA
- Art. 55 PRA
- Art. 56 PRA
- Art. 57 PRA
- Art. 58 PRA
- Art. 59a PRA
- Art. 59b PRA
- Art. 59c PRA
- Art. 60 PRA
- Art. 60a PRA
- Art. 62 PRA
- Art. 63 PRA
- Art. 64 PRA
- Art. 67 PRA
- Art. 67a PRA
- Art. 67b PRA
- Art. 73 PRA
- Art. 73a PRA
- Art. 75 PRA
- Art. 75a PRA
- Art. 76 PRA
- Art. 76a PRA
- Art. 90 PRA
-
- Art. 1 IMAC
- Art. 1a IMAC
- Art. 3 para. 1 and 2 IMAC
- Art. 8 IMAC
- Art. 8a IMAC
- Art. 11b IMAC
- Art. 16 IMAC
- Art. 17 IMAC
- Art. 17a IMAC
- Art. 32 IMAC
- Art. 35 IMAC
- Art. 47 IMAC
- Art. 54 IMAC
- Art. 55a IMAC
- Art. 63 IMAC
- Art. 67 IMAC
- Art. 67a IMAC
- Art. 74 IMAC
- Art. 74a IMAC
- Art. 80 IMAC
- Art. 80a IMAC
- Art. 80b IMAC
- Art. 80c IMAC
- Art. 80d IMAC
- Art. 80h IMAC
- Art. 80k IMAC
-
- Vorb. zu Art. 1 FADP
- Art. 1 FADP
- Art. 2 FADP
- Art. 3 FADP
- Art. 4 FADP
- Art. 5 lit. c FADP
- Art. 5 lit. d FADP
- Art. 5 lit. f und g FADP
- Art. 6 para. 3-5 FADP
- Art. 6 Abs. 6 and 7 FADP
- Art. 7 FADP
- Art. 10 FADP
- Art. 11 FADP
- Art. 12 FADP
- Art. 14 FADP
- Art. 15 FADP
- Art. 18 FADP
- Art. 19 FADP
- Art. 20 FADP
- Art. 22 FADP
- Art. 23 FADP
- Art. 25 FADP
- Art. 26 FADP
- Art. 27 FADP
- Art. 31 para. 2 lit. e FADP
- Art. 33 FADP
- Art. 34 FADP
- Art. 35 FADP
- Art. 38 FADP
- Art. 39 FADP
- Art. 40 FADP
- Art. 41 FADP
- Art. 42 FADP
- Art. 43 FADP
- Art. 44 FADP
- Art. 44a FADP
- Art. 45 FADP
- Art. 46 FADP
- Art. 47 FADP
- Art. 47a FADP
- Art. 48 FADP
- Art. 49 FADP
- Art. 50 FADP
- Art. 51 FADP
- Art. 52 FADP
- Art. 54 FADP
- Art. 55 FADP
- Art. 57 FADP
- Art. 58 FADP
- Art. 60 FADP
- Art. 61 FADP
- Art. 62 FADP
- Art. 63 FADP
- Art. 64 FADP
- Art. 65 FADP
- Art. 66 FADP
- Art. 67 FADP
- Art. 69 FADP
- Art. 72 FADP
- Art. 72a FADP
-
- Art. 2 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 3 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 4 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 5 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 6 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 7 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 8 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 9 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 11 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 12 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 16 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 18 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 25 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 27 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 28 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 29 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 32 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 33 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 34 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
-
- Art. 2 para. 1 AMLA
- Art. 2a para. 1-2 and 4-5 AMLA
- Art. 2 para. 2 AMLA
- Art. 2 para. 3 AMLA
- Art. 3 AMLA
- Art. 7 AMLA
- Art. 7a AMLA
- Art. 8 AMLA
- Art. 8a AMLA
- Art. 11 AMLA
- Art. 14 AMLA
- Art. 15 AMLA
- Art. 20 AMLA
- Art. 23 AMLA
- Art. 24 AMLA
- Art. 24a AMLA
- Art. 25 AMLA
- Art. 26 AMLA
- Art. 26a AMLA
- Art. 27 AMLA
- Art. 28 AMLA
- Art. 29 AMLA
- Art. 29a AMLA
- Art. 29b AMLA
- Art. 30 AMLA
- Art. 31 AMLA
- Art. 31a AMLA
- Art. 32 AMLA
- Art. 33 AMLA
- Art. 34 AMLA
- Art. 38 AMLA
FEDERAL CONSTITUTION
MEDICAL DEVICES ORDINANCE
CODE OF OBLIGATIONS
FEDERAL LAW ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW
LUGANO CONVENTION
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE
FEDERAL ACT ON POLITICAL RIGHTS
CIVIL CODE
FEDERAL ACT ON CARTELS AND OTHER RESTRAINTS OF COMPETITION
FEDERAL ACT ON INTERNATIONAL MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
DEBT ENFORCEMENT AND BANKRUPTCY ACT
FEDERAL ACT ON DATA PROTECTION
CRIMINAL CODE
CYBERCRIME CONVENTION
COMMERCIAL REGISTER ORDINANCE
FEDERAL ACT ON COMBATING MONEY LAUNDERING AND TERRORIST FINANCING
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
FEDERAL ACT ON THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSFER OF CULTURAL PROPERTY
FEDERAL ACT ON MEDICINAL PRODUCTS AND MEDICAL DEVICES
- I. General Provisions
- II. Quorum (para. 1)
- III. Form of Resolution (para. 2)
- IV. Minutes (para. 3)
- V. Further Notes
- Bibliography
- Materials
I. General Provisions
1 Article 713 of the Swiss Code of Obligations (CO) governs the adoption and documentation of resolutions by the Board of Directors (“BoD”). It thereby establishes the rules governing the decision-making process of the BoD, understood as a corporate body. Where the BoD has established committees, the provisions of Article 713 CO are often applied by analogy to such committees as well.
2 As part of the revision of the Swiss Companies Act of June 19, 2020 (effective as of January 1, 2023), paragraph 2 in particular, concerning the possible methods of decision-making, was revised. The use of electronic means of communication to hold meetings is now explicitly permitted, as is the adoption of resolutions without oral deliberation in writing in electronic form—and, if necessary, even without a signature. Furthermore, paragraph 3 reflects the abolition of the formal position of the secretary of the board of directors, which was implemented with the revision of the Stock Corporation Act, by now referring to the minute-taker. Of course, the board of directors is free to establish a secretariat.
3 The recording of a Board resolution in minutes is not a requirement for validity, which is why the absence of proper minutes does not a priori render the resolution null and void. However, a Board that fails to record its resolutions commits a breach of duty with corresponding liability consequences for resulting damages. Even a single-member Board must therefore record its resolutions.
4 The Board minutes must be drafted in the language in which the meeting was held; circular resolutions may be drafted in languages that all Board members are proficient in. It should be noted that foreign-language minutes intended to serve as evidence for the commercial register must, if necessary, be translated into the language required by the competent cantonal commercial register.
II. Quorum (para. 1)
A. Decision-Making Quorum
5 The Board of Directors makes its decisions as a body by majority vote (so-called decision-making quorum). Each Board member has one vote, and—subject to any contrary provisions in the Articles of Association or bylaws—the majority of the votes cast decides. The votes of Board members who abstain (whether required to do so or by choice) do not count toward the resolution quorum. A qualified resolution quorum analogous to that of the General Meeting (“GM”) is not provided for, but may be stipulated in the Articles of Association or in the organizational regulations.
6 The chairperson of the respective Board meeting has the casting vote unless the Articles of Association provide otherwise. By virtue of this prerogative, the chairperson may, in the event of a tie, determine that the Board pass a resolution even though the resolution did not receive a majority of votes among the Board members due to the deadlock. The legislature thereby facilitates the adoption of resolutions compared to a strict majority principle, under which a decision can only be made if the majority of Board members vote in favor of a resolution and under which a tie does not constitute a resolution. It is common to encounter articles of association that grant the casting vote to the Chair (or Co-Chair) of the Board. This leads to ambiguities if the Chair of the Board of Directors is not presiding over a Board meeting.
B. Attendance Quorum
7 It is permissible, but not necessary, to stipulate in the articles of association or in the organizational regulations that the Board of Directors is only quorate if a certain number of members participate in the decision-making process (so-called attendance quorum). In such cases, a valid resolution requires the participation of the required number of members. If a quorum of members present is to be provided for, it is advisable to include an explicit provision on how to proceed with Board members who recuse themselves during a vote.
8 With regard to declarations by the Board of Directors in connection with capital increases or reductions that require public certification, it seems reasonable for the articles of association or the organizational regulations to provide that the presence of just one Board member is sufficient.
9 According to prevailing doctrine, proxy voting on the Board of Directors—even by another Board member—is considered impermissible because the duties of the Board are deemed strictly personal and non-transferable. Board resolutions that are adopted solely through proxy voting could thus be deemed null and void. Nevertheless, numerous authors advocate for the admissibility of representation within narrow limits. Given the now-simple possibilities for electronic decision-making (see N. 21 below), the question arises as to whether representation is even necessary anymore. One possible solution would be to first hold a board meeting without the participation of the “represented” board member, with the formal resolution being adopted subsequently by circular resolution. The discussion held during the board meeting could then be made available to all board members as minutes and an appendix to the circular resolution to be adopted.
III. Form of Resolution (para. 2)
10 Resolutions of the Board of Directors may be adopted at physical and/or virtual (i.e., held using electronic means) meetings, as well as through circular resolutions on paper or in electronic form. These forms of resolution are considered equivalent. It is customary for larger companies to specify the form of resolution for the Board of Directors in greater detail in their organizational regulations.
A. In a meeting with a physical venue (no. 1)
11 In the traditional format of a physical meeting, in which the Board members participate in person, the oral discussion of the agenda items is followed by a vote. While this method of decision-making affords the Board members less geographical flexibility, However, the physical presence of the meeting participants also has advantages, as it enables a direct exchange of views during the meeting as well as direct contact before and after the meeting, which can be particularly helpful in reaching a consensus on sensitive matters. In this scenario, an absent board member is not permitted to submit their vote in writing in advance or to be represented at the meeting. The principle of immediacy applies.
B. Using electronic means (no. 2)
12 Board meetings using electronic means, which have long been standard practice, particularly for internationally active companies, are now explicitly provided for by law. The new Art. 713 para. 2 CO refers in this regard to the provisions on the use of electronic means in the general meeting in Art. 701c–701e CO, which apply mutatis mutandis. Thus, both hybrid meetings, in which participants are present at a physical location as well as those connected electronically, and meetings held entirely virtually are possible. The law is formulated in a technology-neutral manner, so that various platforms may be used, such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or group calls via WhatsApp or Threema. It is advisable to specify the electronic means used in the minutes. It is essential that the resolution be a decision made within the framework of an immediate oral deliberation. Even with this option, it is not permissible for a board member to submit their vote in writing in advance or to be represented (digital immediacy must be ensured; see N. 11 above).
13 It can be inferred from the reference to Art. 701c CO that a Board resolution regarding the admissibility of this type of meeting is required, whether on an ad hoc basis prior to the meeting, in organizational regulations, or in other regulations.
14 As with the general meeting, the formation of will and resolution-making must also be protected in accordance with Art. 701e para. 2 CO when conducting a board meeting using electronic means. Thus, the identity of the participating board members must be verified, although identification is simpler here than in a virtual general meeting due to the smaller number of participants and the known group of attendees. Furthermore, remarks must be transmitted in real time, and it must be ensured that every member can submit motions and participate in the discussion. To this end, it is also required that every member has access to any meeting documents provided and can follow presentations by meeting participants. Finally, it must be ensured that the voting results cannot be falsified.
15 If technical problems (malfunctions or failure of electronic equipment) arise during a virtual or hybrid board meeting, such that the meeting can no longer be conducted properly, the meeting must be suspended or terminated. The portion affected by the technical disruption must be repeated. Resolutions that were properly placed on the agenda, discussed, and adopted prior to the technical disruption remain valid. Compared to a virtual general meeting, virtual board meetings have lower thresholds for what constitutes a “technical problem” (e.g., whether it must fall within the company’s sphere of responsibility or regarding how many shareholders must be affected). According to legal doctrine, a relevant technical problem is deemed to exist in Board meetings if a Board member is prevented from participating, regardless of whose area of responsibility the problem falls under. However, this cannot be interpreted as a free pass to wilfully terminate an unwelcome Board meeting, for example by intentionally interrupting the internet connection. Such conduct violates the duty of loyalty of the board members and, as a manifest abuse of rights, is not protected by law. In unclear situations, it may be helpful for the board members remaining in the meeting to resolve whether the member who is no longer participating is to be considered as intentionally absent from the meeting and whether the meeting should continue.
C. By Written Procedure (No. 3)
16 Ch. 16 governs the adoption of resolutions by the Board of Directors through written procedure (so-called circular resolution). This method of resolution-making is equivalent to resolution-making in a (physical, virtual, or hybrid) meeting. Subject to any deviating provisions in the articles of association or organizational regulations, the normal attendance and voting quorums apply to resolutions passed in writing (see, however, below regarding the right to oral deliberation).
17 The distinctive feature of this type of resolution is that no discussion is provided for within the framework of a meeting. The motion to the Board members should therefore be worded in such a way that it can be answered with a simple “Yes,” “No,” or “Abstain.” In practice, the resolution is typically phrased in the affirmative, and all Board members sign this resolution. However, every individual board member has the right to demand an oral discussion—without giving reasons. Conversely, an explicit request is required. De facto, there is a requirement for unanimity or a right of veto regarding the method of decision-making (not to be confused with a potential decision-making quorum). However, the duty of care of the individual board member may, under certain circumstances, imply an obligation to request an oral consultation for complex matters with far-reaching consequences, provided that more detailed information or a more in-depth exchange is necessary for the decision-making process.
18 The decision-making process is initiated by sending the relevant motion to the board members, typically by the Chairman of the Board. Board members are required to provide feedback in two respects: 1. Approval of the method of decision-making (or a request for an oral consultation) and 2. Approval, rejection, or abstention regarding the content of the resolution. It is recommended that a deadline for response be set for the Board members. It makes sense to generally define this deadline in organizational regulations, although deviations appropriate to individual cases should be permitted. For non-urgent matters, five business days should suffice. If no such deadline is set, Art. 5 para. 1 of the Swiss CO shall apply.
19 The question arises as to how to proceed if a Board member does not respond to the motion. If a motion was verifiably delivered to a Board member via a standard channel and that Board member does not respond within the set deadline, this may be interpreted as implied consent to the manner of decision-making, as the law stipulates that an oral deliberation must be requested. Regarding the content of the resolution, silence is presumed to constitute an abstention (with the corresponding consequences regarding the normally applicable attendance and voting quorums). It makes sense to provide for this in the motion itself. Even after the required majority has been reached, the circular resolution remains subject to a suspensive condition until the deadline expires, as a member may still request an oral deliberation. If a member does not respond, a formal confirmation of the resolution by the Chairman of the Board of Directors or the Board member who sent the motion appears necessary. Böckli then advises that circular resolutions be submitted for approval at the following meeting.
20 It is advisable to set forth the procedure and details regarding decision-making by written means in a practical and concrete manner in an organizational regulation.
21 In the course of the revision of the Stock Corporation Act, circular resolutions by written means in electronic form were explicitly declared permissible. Electronic means, for example, the exchange of emails or the use of electronic board portals. Statements via messaging services such as WhatsApp or Threema may also suffice for this purpose, provided that the expression of intent is clear and unambiguous and the senders are clearly identified. A signature by the board member on the circular resolution is therefore not required, unless this is stipulated in writing by the board. A qualified electronic signature or a PDF copy of the signed motion may also be dispensed with. It is still common practice for each board member to sign the circular resolution document, scan it, and return it. There is still no objection to this practice. In connection with circular resolutions made in writing, particularly in electronic form, the requirements of Art. 23 of the CRO must be observed. For example, for the purposes of the Commercial Register, a so-called certification record must be prepared for a Board resolution adopted electronically, which must be signed by at least one Board member authorized to represent the company. This record should reasonably include the procedure for the written resolution as well as the voting results.
22 Regarding the impermissible combination of resolution-making at a meeting and a circular resolution, see N. 11 above.
IV. Minutes (para. 3)
23 Unlike at the general meeting, the board minutes must be drafted as deliberation minutes (also referred to as proceedings or discussion minutes). A record in text form is required. Video or audio recordings cannot be considered minutes. If the minutes directly refer to supplementary documents or slides presented, it is appropriate to attach these as an appendix to the minutes. In the case of resolutions recorded in a public notarial act, however, only the resolutions themselves are the subject of the notarial recording.
24 The minutes of the meeting must reflect the resolutions adopted (including voting results, unless unanimous) as well as the key arguments and positions expressed during the meeting in summary form. Board members may, however, request that individual statements made by them be recorded verbatim in the minutes. Taking minutes of board meetings is therefore very demanding. In practice, the following structure is recommended: 1. Background, 2. Discussion, and 3. Resolution. Furthermore, it is advisable to formulate resolutions clearly as such and to highlight them graphically, as well as to clearly assign pending matters.
25 Otherwise, the law does not specify clear requirements for the general content of the minutes, which is independent of the specific agenda item. Reference can be made to the templates of some commercial registry offices (e.g., the Canton of Zurich) or practical literature. In addition to the proceedings and resolutions, the company name, the format or location, the date, the time (start and end), as well as the participants and guests of the meeting are essential.
26 Finally, the minutes must be signed by the chairperson and the minute-taker of the respective meeting (in wet ink or via qualified electronic signature) as soon as they have agreed on the content. Subsequent approval of the minutes by the Board of Directors, as is often provided for, is not legally required but is recommended, as it strengthens the presumption of accuracy. It should also be noted that the keeping of minutes is an obligation of the Board of Directors as a body.
27 The minute-taker is free to use technical aids for speech recognition or automated summarization via artificial intelligence, but remains responsible for the content, including under criminal law.
V. Further Notes
28 If a Board resolution results in a fact that is entered in the Commercial Register, the original Board minutes, or an extract thereof, or a circular resolution must be submitted to the Commercial Register Office as supporting documentation. If a resolution is subject to notarization, the notarized document must be submitted as supporting documentation.
29 Whether a board resolution must be adopted by public notarization is governed by law (e.g., when the articles of association are amended pursuant to Art. 647 CO). Board resolutions adopted in a virtual or hybrid meeting may be publicly notarized if there is a continuous video and audio transmission between the notary and the chairperson. In practice, it is often required that the notary be in the same room as the chairperson. Circular resolutions may be notarized by having the notary personally participate in the counting of the votes received and verify the organization of the circular procedure. The voting result and the declaration that the resolution has been passed are then recorded in the public document (so-called certification protocol). In the case of virtual board meetings, the certification required by the notary public—confirming that certain supporting documents were available to the board members—should not pose any significant problems: Either the documents are prepared in duplicate, or certified copies are made. While the notary has the originals in front of them, the board members have either additional originals or certified copies and hold these up to the camera to confirm their availability. If, on the other hand, the resolution is passed by circular resolution, the requirement is likely met only if the presence of a single board member is deemed sufficient for board resolutions subject to notarization in the context of a capital increase; otherwise, a (physical or virtual) board meeting cannot be dispensed with.
30 If a resolution requiring notarization is adopted at a meeting abroad, the document must first be super-certified or provided with an apostille to be admissible for entry in the Commercial Register. Furthermore, the Commercial Register Office may require proof that the foreign notarization procedure is equivalent to the public notarization procedure in Switzerland and may request an expert opinion for this purpose and designate the expert.
31 Under certain circumstances, board minutes may qualify as declarations of intent by the board members present.
32 Particularly with regard to liability or reimbursement proceedings against board members, it should be noted that board minutes constitute admissible evidence (document pursuant to Art. 177 of the Swiss CPC, or public document pursuant to Art. 9 of the Swiss CC and Art. 179 of the Swiss CPC). They can be used to demonstrate due diligence. Accordingly, board members are well advised to request copies of the minutes.
33 There is no analogous provision regarding the keeping of minutes for the management of a GmbH, although it is recommended. In the case of a cooperative, the administration is responsible for ensuring that its minutes are kept. The relevant literature, but not the law, refers to Art. 713 CO regarding stock corporation law.
Bibliography
Aus der Au Roman/Brand Patric/Heller Jan, Kommentierung zu den Übergangsbestimmungen zur Aktienrechtsrevision vom 19. Juni 2020, in: Müller Lukas (Hrsg.), Onlinekommentar zum Obligationenrecht – Version: 01.09.2023: https://onlinekommentar.ch/de/kommentare/or-uebest-aktienrecht (besucht am 14.1.2026), DOI: 10.17176/20230901-085735-0.
Bainbridge Stephen M., The Board of Directors, in: The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Law and Governance, Gordon Jeffrey N./Ringe Wolf-Georg (Hrsg.), Oxford 2018.
Ballmer David/Fischer Joel, Die hybride und virtuelle Generalversammlung, Kommentierung ausgewählter Streit- und Anwendungsfragen, GesKR 2 (2023), S. 172–189.
Bärtschi Harald, Kommentierung zu Art. 43 HRegV, in: Bärtschi Harald (Hrsg.), Onlinekommentar zur Handelsregisterverordnung – Version: 29.02.2024: https://onlinekommentar.ch/de/kommentare/hregv43 (besucht am 13.2.2026), DOI: 10.17176/20240322-084550-0.
Böckli Peter, Schweizer Aktienrecht, 5. Aufl., Zürich et al. 2022.
Bühler Christoph B., Kommentierung zu Art. 713 OR, in: Handschin Lukas (Hrsg.), Die Aktiengesellschaft, Generalversammlung und Verwaltungsrat. Mängel in der Organisation, Art. 698–726 und 731b OR, Zürcher Kommentar, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2018.
Carron Blaise/Chabloz Isabelle, Kommentierung zu Art. 902 OR, in: Tercier Pierre/Trigo Trindade Rita/Canapa Damiano (Hrsg.), Commentaire Romand, Code des obligations II, Art. 530–1186 CO, Art. 120–141 LIMF, Introductions à la LFus et la LTI, 3. Aufl., Basel 2024.
economiesuisse, Swiss Code of Best Practice for Corporate Governance, 2023, https://backend-api.economiesuisse.ch//sites/default/files/2025-12/SwissCode_DE_RZ.pdf, besucht am 2.2.2026.
Ernst Wolfgang, Beschlussfassung im schriftlichen Verfahren, recht 3 (2020), S. 168–172.
Forstmoser Peter/Küchler Marcel, Schweizerisches Aktienrecht 2020, Bern 2021.
Forstmoser Peter, Organisation und Organisationsreglement der Aktiengesellschaft, Zürich 2011.
Galli Dario/Vischer Markus, In Verwaltungsratsprotokollen enthaltene Willenserklärungen zum Abschluss eines Vertrags, recht 4 (2024), S. 229–240.
Häusermann Daniel/Anceschi Fabio, Kommentierung zu Art. 701f OR, in: Wildhaber Isabelle/Häusermann Daniel/Honsell Heinrich (Hrsg.), Kurzkommentar zum Obligationenrecht, 2. Aufl., Basel 2026.
Jutzi Thomas/Meier Quirin, Übersicht über die Neuerungen im Aktienrecht, in: Wolf Stephan (Hrsg.), Das neue Aktienrecht – insbesondere Aspekte aus der notariellen Praxis, Schriften INR, Bern 2023, S. 1–83.
Mahler Bruno, Die öffentliche Beurkundung im Aktienrecht unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Aktienrechtsrevision 2020, Zürich 2025, DOI: 10.36862/6GTK-6DSH.
Milano Umberto/Aus der Au Roman, Documenting Shareholder Resolutions. Selected Questions on Minutes and Circular Resolutions after the Corporate Law Reform, in: swisNot/Neri-Castracane Giulia/Frésard Philippe (Hrsg.), Festschrift. Beiträge zum neuen Aktienrecht. Eine fünfundzwanzigjährige notarielle Zusammenarbeit im interkantonalen Bereich, Zürich/Genf 2025, S. 51–66.
Müller Lukas, Virtuelle und hybride Versammlungen, in: Franz Beat/Mooser Michel (Hrsg.), Gesellschaftsrecht – Aktualitäten und ausgewählte Fragen, Beiträge der Weiterbildungsseminare der Stiftung Schweizerisches Notariat vom 22. August 2025 in Zürich und vom 11. September 2025 in Lausanne, Zürich/Genf 2025, S. 223–272 (zit. Müller L., S. x).
Müller Lukas/Kaiser Philippe J.A./Benz Diego, Die öffentliche Beurkundung bei elektronischen und virtuellen Generalversammlungen sowie Zirkularbeschlüssen, Praxiserfahrungen und Ausblick auf das neue Aktienrecht sowie beurkundungsrechtliche Aspekte, REPRAX 3 (2020), S. 217–269.
Müller Roland, Protokollführung und Protokollauswertung bei Sitzungen und Versammlungen, 4. Aufl., Zürich/St. Gallen 2025 (zit. Müller R., S. x).
Müller Roland/Lipp Lorenz/Plüss Adrian, Der Verwaltungsrat – Band I, 5. Aufl., Zürich 2021.
Müller Roland/Thalmann Philipp, Stellvertretung und Rechtsvertretung im Verwaltungsrat, REPRAX 2 (2011), S. 1–19.
Peter Henry/Birchler Francesca, Kommentierung zu Art. 713 OR, in: Tercier Pierre/Trigo Trindade Rita/Canapa Damiano (Hrsg.), Commentaire Romand, Code des obligations II, Art. 530–1186 CO, Art. 120–141 LIMF, Introductions à la LFus et la LTI, 3. Aufl., Basel 2024.
Plüss Adrian, Der Verwaltungsrat, in: Nobel Peter/Müller Christoph (Hrsg.), Berner Kommentar, Das Aktienrecht der ersten Stunde, Bern 2023.
Plüss Adrian/Facincani Nicolas, Kommentierung zu Art. 713 OR, in: Roberto Vito/Trüeb Hans Rudolf (Hrsg.), CHK-Handkommentar zum Schweizer Privatrecht, Personengesellschaften und Aktiengesellschaft, Art. 530–771 OR, 4. Aufl., Zürich 2023.
Reiser Nina/Egli Viviane, Digitale Generalversammlungen und Verwaltungsratssitzungen: erste Erfahrungen und Empfehlungen, SZW/RSDA 2 (2025), S. 120–134.
Rüesch Adrian/Forster Matthias, § 39, Durchführung der Verwaltungsratssitzungen, in: Handbuch Schweizer Aktienrecht, Theus Simoni Fabiana/Hauser Isabel/Bärtschi Harald (Hrsg.), 2. Aufl., Basel 2022.
Schenker Urs/Schenker Olivier, Praxisleitfaden zum revidierten Aktienrecht, Bern 2023.
Semi Melda/Müller Lukas, Das neue Aktienrecht vom 19. Juni 2020 aus Sicht des Beurkundungsrechts, Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Beurkundungs- und Grundbuchrecht 6/2022, S. 329–351.
Stach Patrick, Kommentierung zu Art. 713 OR, in: Kren Kostkiewicz Jolanta/Amstutz Marc/Wolf Stephan/Fankhauser Roland (Hrsg.), OR Kommentar zum Schweizerischen Obligationenrecht, 4. Aufl., Zürich 2023
Sunaric Predrag/Catelli Cinzia, Kommentierung zu Art. 713 OR, in: Wildhaber Isabelle/Häusermann Daniel/Honsell Heinrich (Hrsg.), Kurzkommentar zum Obligationenrecht, 2. Aufl., Basel 2026.
Vischer Markus, Protokollierung von GV- und VR-Beschlüssen als Gültigkeitsform, SZW/RSDA 5 (2022), S. 416–429.
Vogel Alexander, Orell Füssli Kommentar HRegV, Kommentar zur Handelsregisterverordnung, 2. Aufl., Zürich 2023.
Vogel Alexander, Kommentierung zu Art. 809 OR, in: Wildhaber Isabelle/Häusermann Daniel/Honsell Heinrich (Hrsg.), Kurzkommentar zum Obligationenrecht, 2. Aufl., Basel 2026.
von der Crone Hans Caspar, Aktienrecht, 2. Aufl., Bern 2020.
Watter Rolf, Kommentierung zu Art. 902 OR, in: Watter Rolf/Vogt Hans-Ueli (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Obligationenrecht II, 6. Aufl., Basel 2024.
Watter Rolf/Flückiger Sebastian, Beschlussfassung unter abwesenden VR-Mitgliedern (inkl. durch Zirkularbeschluss), GesKR 3 (2015), S. 410–416.
Watter Rolf/Pöschel Ines, Neinsager und Nichtstimmer: ihre aktienrechtliche Verantwortlichkeit, GesKR 1 (2011), S. 14–19.
Watter Rolf/Roth Pellanda Katja, Kommentierung zu Art. 809 OR, in: Watter Rolf/Vogt Hans-Ueli (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Obligationenrecht II, 6. Aufl., Basel 2024.
Wernli Martin, Kommentierung zu Art. 713 OR, in: Watter Rolf/Vogt Hans-Ueli (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Obligationenrecht II, 6. Aufl., Basel 2024.
Zindel Gaudenz G./Isler Peter R., Kommentierung zu Art. 652g OR, in: Watter Rolf/Vogt Hans-Ueli (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Obligationenrecht II, 6. Aufl., Basel 2024.
Materials
Botschaft zur Änderung des Obligationenrechts (Aktienrecht) vom 23.11.2016, BBl 2017 399 ff., abrufbar unter https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/federal-gazette/2017/399.pdf, besucht am 7.2.2026.