Answer ... Limited discovery is available, but nothing like what is allowed in US pre-trial discovery.

Answer ... Pre-trial discovery powers in Switzerland include the court’s ability to order seizure of allegedly infringing product or associated process machinery, based on a prima facie showing of infringement (whether actual or imminent), before the filing of the suit. There is no need to show irreparable harm or legitimate interest.

In addition, before the suit is filed, a party – backed by an allegation of relevant facts and a statement of relevance of the evidence sought – can ask the court to order the provisional seizure of evidence if:

• it is prima facie established that this evidence is likely to be destroyed or abandoned; or
• there is another legitimate interest for the seizure, such as in determining whether a future suit has merit.

During the court proceedings, the court can order a party to produce specific documents in a party’s custody if shown to be prima facie relevant to the outcome of the case. Consequently, fishing expeditions, being devoid of any reasoned support, are excluded. A party’s refusal to comply with the court order can be taken into account when weighing the evidence. The court is also vested with the power to compel third parties to produce specific documents if it is shown that they are relevant to the outcome of the case. This also extends to accounting and sales documents needed to establish damages.

Due to the urgency of seeking a preliminary injunction, only evidence that is readily available is admitted in these proceedings, typically documentary evidence. There is no time to hear from witnesses or experts.

Answer ... Any evidence sought must be based upon prima facie arguments showing the relevance of the evidence to the outcome of the case. So long as a prima facie argument can be provided and a reason given as to why the party only became aware of the possible existence of pertinent evidence, further discovery may be permitted.