Key legal question
Whether the appeal against the Federal Administrative Court’s non-entry judgment was sufficiently reasoned under the Federal Supreme Court Act.
Extracted holding
No. The appellants did not address the reasoning of the challenged judgment and merely repeated arguments against the naturalization refusal itself.
Extracted reasoning
Under Arts. 42 para. 1-2 and 106 para. 2 LTF, the appeal must specifically discuss the contested decision and identify the legal violation. The brief submitted concerned the merits of naturalization, not the procedural issue of non-payment of the advance of costs.