In its judgment, the Federal Supreme Court (the Court) dismissed, insofar as it was admissible, the appeal of a therapist against her conviction for the unlawful use of a protected professional designation. The question in dispute was whether the designation "psychosexologue" fell within the scope of art. 45 para. 1 let. a of the Psychology Professions Act (Bundesgesetz über die Psychologieberufe, PsyG).

The therapist holds several qualifications obtained abroad, none of which is recognised in Switzerland. Between 2018 and January 2022, she had used the designations "psycho-sexologue" and "psychosexologue" in her practice and on websites. The Criminal Court of the Cantonal Court of Neuchâtel (Tribunal cantonal de la République et canton de Neuchâtel, Cour pénale) found her guilty of a negligent violation of art. 45 para. 1 let. a PsyG and imposed a fine of CHF 500.00.

The appellant argued that the PsyG only protected the designation "psychologist". In her view, the cantonal court's interpretation would prohibit any designation containing the prefix "psycho". The Court rejected this argument. Art. 45 para. 1 let. a PsyG covered not only the designation "psychologist", but any designation falsely suggesting a recognised diploma in psychology. The purpose of the PsyG, namely to protect consumers from deception and to ensure transparency, could not be achieved otherwise. The designation "sexologist" alone was not misleading. However, the prefix "psycho" suggested qualifications beyond sexology. A layperson would therefore assume that the therapist held a recognised diploma in psychology.

The appellant's complaint of a violation of economic freedom under art. 27 of the Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation was inadmissible, as she had not raised it before the cantonal court. In any event, she remained free to offer her services under other designations, such as "sexologist" or "couples therapist".

For more information, see here.