Asset managers that retain retrocessions argue that they are needed for providing general services such as maintaining a website. Legal Situation Switzerland Supreme Court Ruling 22.03.2006 The Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland found in a major decision in 2006 (BGE 132 II 460 ff). This groundbreaking decisions stated that kickbacks distributed paid to external asset managers belong to the client and therefore have to be forwarded to them. Supreme Court Ruling 30.10.2012 The second Judgement of the Swiss Federal Court (4A_127/2012, 4A_141/2012) concerning retrocessions decided that banks are also not entitled to keep retrocessions received when buying in-house products for client portfolios. Such as in 2006, the possible conflict of interest was key for the Federal Supreme Court decision. Supreme Court Ruling 16.06.2017 The judgement (4A_508/2016) delivered by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court on 16. June 2017 clarifies the statutory limitation of retrocessions. Clients can recover retrocessions withheld by Swiss asset management companies retroactively for the last 10 years. The statutory limitation period begins on the day on which the Swiss asset management company received the retrocession. Trade Court Ruling 15.11.2017 HG 150054 states: Clients with execution-only-mandates also have a right to receive the retrocessions and finder's fees that were unlawfully retained by Swiss banks and asset managers. Supreme Court Ruling 14.08.2018 In ruling 6B_689/2016, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court held that the failure to disclose adequately retrocessions may constitute an act of criminal mismanagement. Germany With the implementation of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II) by the Second Financial Market Regulatory Act (2nd FiMaNoG), the transfer of funds to asset managers in Germany was set out in Section 64 (7) WpHG introduced a general ban on accepting and retaining contributions from third parties or persons acting for them. The ban has been in force since 3 January 2018. The previous exemption, according to which such allowances could be collected if they improved the quality of the services provided to the customer and were disclosed to the customer, has been dropped. Section 64 (7) sentence 4 of the WpHG now expressly provides that all monetary benefits assumed in connection with financial portfolio management are to be distributed to the customer as soon as reasonably possible after receipt and in full. Liechtenstein In Liechtenstein, there is no relevant case law for the recovery of retrocessions arising from asset-liability contracts, in contrast to Switzerland. However, as in Switzerland, the contractual