Federal Insurance Court
Open-knowledge reference entry
The Federal Insurance Court of Switzerland (FIC; German: Eidgenössisches Versicherungsgericht, French: Tribunal fédéral des assurances, Italian: Tribunale federale delle assicurazioni; Romansh: Tribunal federal d'assicuranzas) was an independent division of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court based in Lucerne. Responsible for judicial review of administrative decisions related to social security, it was composed of eleven full-time and eleven part-time judges.
Effective January 1, 2007, the FIC was completely merged with the Federal Supreme Court as the revised Federal Court Law entered into force.
Judges
As of December 2006, the full-time judges of the FIC were:
Aldo Borella
Pierre Ferrari, vice president
Jean-Maurice Frésard
Yves Kernen
Susanne Leuzinger-Naef, president
Alois Lustenberger
Ulrich Meyer
Hansjörg Seiler
Franz Schön
Rudolf Ursprung
Ursula Widmer-Schmid
The judges, now members of the regular Supreme Court, were elected by the Federal Assembly of Switzerland and served for six years; reelections were possible.
The public source identifies “Federal Insurance Court” as open-knowledge reference entry. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Federal, Insurance and Court.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Federal Insurance Court”, the useful work is to connect “open-knowledge reference entry” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Feb 12, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5440260. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2007 and 2006.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Federal Insurance Court”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Federal Insurance Court primary sources, Federal Insurance Court archive and Federal research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Federal Insurance Court”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Federal Insurance Court” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.