Skip to content

Uncertainties due to A Mail Plus

A Mail Plus causes uncertainty, especially when it comes to deadlines

With A Mail Plus, Swiss Post does not confirm the delivery to a recipient, but only the deposit in the letterbox or P.O. box. This difference to traditional registered mail regularly leads to incorrectly calculated deadlines.

How A Mail Plus and registered mail differ

With A Mail Plus, Swiss Post promises greater transparency throughout the entire shipping process. As with registered mail, the current processing and delivery status can be tracked at any time.

In contrast to registered mail, however, receipt by the recipient is not acknowledged. With A Mail Plus, Swiss Post merely confirms that a consignment has been deposited in the recipient’s letterbox or P.O. box. Depositing the consignment is already considered delivery. This means that there is neither personal delivery nor – if the recipient is absent – notification by depositing a collection invitation with a deadline.

Problem: Different deadlines

The deadlines for A Mail Plus and registered mail always differ if a registered letter is not delivered directly, but only a collection invitation is deposited. The opening date is either the day on which the consignment is collected or, at the latest, the seventh day after the first delivery attempt (so-called delivery fiction). The recipient of a registered letter can therefore delay the start of the deadline by up to one week. In contrast, the recipient of an A Mail Plus item is at a disadvantage. The start of the deadline cannot be influenced in any way.

In addition, the time limit for appeals is often calculated incorrectly in cases where an item is sent on Friday, delivered to a PO box on Saturday and not collected until Monday. A registered letter sent in this way is considered opened on Monday. The deadline begins on Tuesday. On the other hand, an A Mail Plus consignment that is also collected on Monday is deemed to have been opened on Saturday. The deadline therefore begins on Sunday.

Items sent with A Mail Plus therefore generally have shorter delivery times. When calculating the deadline, it is always advisable to check the exact delivery date using Swiss Post Track & Trace.

A Mail Plus not legally permissible everywhere

In criminal proceedings, notices from the criminal authorities must be served by registered post or by other means against confirmation of receipt. According to the Federal Supreme Court, delivery by A Mail Plus does not meet the legal requirements.

A similar rule applies in civil proceedings. For example, summonses, orders and decisions must be sent by registered post or by other means against confirmation of receipt. However, other items can be delivered by ordinary mail.

Unnecessary legal uncertainty due to A Mail Plus

In summary, A Mail Plus increases legal uncertainty and makes it unnecessarily difficult to meet deadlines. On the one hand, laypersons are often unaware of the importance of adhering to deadlines or often forget when a notification was received. On the other hand, the organization of smaller law firms in particular is not taken into account. Irrespective of any absences, the period shall in any case commence on the day following delivery. Although Saturday is generally considered a non-working day for authorities and lawyers, it is still possible to serve documents within the deadline.

In our opinion, the increasingly frequent use of A Mail Plus by public authorities and offices is not justified. In contrast to A Mail Plus, delivery by registered mail creates less uncertainty. Any cost considerations – savings of up to CHF 3.90 per shipment are possible – must take a back seat. Consequently, there is a strong suspicion that individual authorities are systematically exploiting the problems outlined above in order to save themselves a relevant number of appeals and thus work by setting time limits. For example, SUVA routinely sends out items with A Mail Plus on Friday, which are then delivered on Saturday.

It remains to be seen whether the Federal Supreme Court will return to the previously tried and tested registered letter or correct its practice in some other way.

Picture of Matthias Fricker

Matthias Fricker

Attorney at law and partner at Fricker and Füllemann Attorneys at Law
Studied at the University of St. Gallen, graduating with a Master in Law (M.A. HSG in Law) in 2012, registered in the Bar Register of the Canton of Zurich, member of the Zurich Bar Association.

All contributions
Picture of Fabian Füllemann

Fabian Füllemann

Attorney at law and partner at Fricker and Füllemann Attorneys at Law
Studied at the Universities of St. Gallen and Zurich, graduating with a Master of Law UZH in 2013, registered with the Zurich Bar Registry, member of the Zurich Bar Association.

All contributions
Picture of Flavia Mattioz

Flavia Mattioz

Trainee at Fricker Füllemann Attorneys at Law.

Share:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Further contributions

Typografische Grafik mit dem Titel Raserdelikt: Der Mittäter auf dem Beifahrersitz aus der Rubrik Recht hat Vorfahrt zum Thema Beifahrer Raserdelikt

Speeding Passengers in the Front Seat – Why Passengers Now Also Face Prison Time and License Revocation

A rude awakening in the passenger seat: A new, landmark ruling by the Federal Supreme Court drastically changes the rules of the road. Until now, a widespread misconception was that anyone not behind the wheel would not face the full force of the law. But from now on, anyone who incites the driver or operates the vehicle’s controls is just as liable as the driver himself. The highest court has ruled unequivocally: Passengers, too, can be convicted of a speeding offense.

Grafik zum Ausländerrecht: Kurzüberblick zum Widerruf C Ausweis und der drohenden Wegweisung aus der Schweiz nach Art. 63 AIG.

Revocation of C permit: when there is a threat of withdrawal of establishment and deportation

The complete revocation of the settlement permit (C permit) is the most severe measure taken by the migration office and ends with removal from Switzerland. As recent Federal Supreme Court rulings show, the authorities take decisive action in the event of massive debts or repeated delinquency. Read how revocation differs from downgrading and why you must use the duration of the appeal procedure to actively defend your settlement.

Would you like us to contact you?

Your lawyers from Winterthur

Do you need support?
Make an appointment now!

📞 Contact us now: Call us on +41 52 222 01 20 or book your initial consultation online 🌐 – it’s quick, easy and binding.

Holiday break

Our office will be closed over the holidays. 

We will be available for you again from Monday, January 5, 2026.

We wish you happy holidays and a happy new year!