Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Practice Questions - Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Avocat spécialiste FSA en droit pénal Exam - Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Practice Questions - Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Avocat spécialiste FSA en droit pénal Exam

Question 1

A cantonal criminal court convicts a defendant for an act not explicitly defined as an offense in the Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), arguing that the behavior is morally reprehensible and closely analogous to an existing statutory misdemeanor. On appeal, defense counsel challenges the conviction. Which fundamental principle of Swiss criminal law has the court violated?

The principle of accelerated proceedings (Art. 5 StPO). The principle of legality (Art. 1 StGB / nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege) and the strict prohibition of customary law and analogy in malam partem. The principle of mandatory prosecution (Art. 7 StPO / Legalitätsprinzip in criminal procedure). The principle of territoriality regarding extraterritorial offenses (Art. 3 StGB).

Correct Answer:

The principle of legality (Art. 1 StGB / nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege) and the strict prohibition of customary law and analogy in malam partem.

Question 2

A defendant committed an act in 2023 when the statutory maximum penalty was 3 years imprisonment. In 2025, before the final first-instance judgment is rendered, the Swiss parliament amends the relevant StGB provision, reducing the maximum penalty to a monetary penalty (Geldstrafe). According to Art. 2 Abs. 2 StGB, which law must the court apply?

The new, more lenient law of 2025 (Lex Mitior principle), because the judgment is rendered after the entry into force of the new legislation. The old law of 2023 exclusively, because the temporal scope of criminal law is strictly determined by the law in force at the time of the commission of the act (Tatzeitrecht). The judge must request a preliminary ruling from the Federal Supreme Court to determine which legislative intent takes precedence. The old law applies to culpability, but the new law applies only if the public prosecutor consents in writing.

Correct Answer:

The new, more lenient law of 2025 (Lex Mitior principle), because the judgment is rendered after the entry into force of the new legislation.

Question 3

A perpetrator standing on French territory fires a rifle across the border, striking and fatally wounding a victim who is standing in Geneva, Switzerland. Under Art. 8 Abs. 1 StGB, does Swiss criminal jurisdiction apply to this offense?

No, because the physical act of shooting occurred entirely outside Swiss sovereign territory. No, unless France formally waives criminal jurisdiction and transfers the proceedings under the European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings. Yes, because under the Principle of Ubiquity (Ubiquitätsprinzip, Art. 8 Abs. 1 StGB), a felony is deemed committed both where the perpetrator acted and where the statutory result occurred. Yes, but only if the victim is a Swiss citizen and the perpetrator subsequently enters Switzerland voluntarily.

Correct Answer:

Yes, because under the Principle of Ubiquity (Ubiquitätsprinzip, Art. 8 Abs. 1 StGB), a felony is deemed committed both where the perpetrator acted and where the statutory result occurred.

Question 4

During a nighttime burglary, a suspect throws a heavy iron crowbar from a third-floor window into a dark courtyard where he knows security guards frequently patrol. He does not specifically desire to hit anyone, but recognizes that hitting a guard is highly probable and thinks: 'If I hit someone, so be it, I need to escape.' The crowbar strikes a guard, causing severe injuries. How is the suspect's subjective culpability classified under Art. 12 Abs. 2 StGB?

Unconscious negligence (Unbewusste Fahrlässigkeit), because he did not consciously focus on the guard's exact location. Conscious negligence (Bewusste Fahrlässigkeit / Luxuria), because he did not explicitly aim the crowbar at the guard. Strict liability (Kausalhaftung), because throwing objects from buildings is inherently dangerous under Swiss tort law. Conditional intent (Eventualvorsatz / Dolus Eventualis), because he considered the realization of the offense possible and accepted/reconciled with it (*Inkaufnahme*).

Correct Answer:

Conditional intent (Eventualvorsatz / Dolus Eventualis), because he considered the realization of the offense possible and accepted/reconciled with it (*Inkaufnahme*).

Question 5

In landmark jurisprudence regarding the boundary between conditional intent (Eventualvorsatz) and conscious negligence (bewusste Fahrlässigkeit, e.g., BGE 133 IV 9, BGE 130 IV 58), what is the decisive criterion established by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgericht)?

Whether the perpetrator reconciled themselves with the realization of the statutory elements (*Inkaufnahme*) or whether they genuinely and trustingly relied on the outcome not occurring (*Vertrauen auf das Ausbleiben des Erfolgs*). Whether the statutory offense carries a minimum custodial sentence of more than one year. Whether the perpetrator possessed a prior criminal record for violent offenses. Whether the victim actively warned the perpetrator immediately prior to the commission of the dangerous act.

Correct Answer:

Question 1

Exam overview

About this Exam

Prepare with the Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Practice Questions - Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Avocat spécialiste FSA en droit pénal Exam practice quiz. This question bank includes 100 questions covering stgb, court, swiss, criminal, and offense. Use it to review important concepts, identify knowledge gaps, and build confidence for the related exam, course, or assessment.

More details

Additional Information

Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Practice Questions - Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Avocat spécialiste FSA en droit pénal Exam

This practice set contains 100 questions from the matching question bank and focuses on stgb, court, swiss, criminal, and offense. Work through each question carefully, review the provided solutions, and revisit topics that need more study before your next attempt.

This is an independent study resource intended for practice and review; it is not an official examination or an endorsement by any organization named in the title.

Quiz information

Frequently Asked Questions

The complete question count is available after full access is unlocked.

No fixed duration is currently configured for this quiz.

Question explanations are included where they are available in the quiz content, helping you review the reasoning after answering.

Yes. You can retake the practice test again as you continue studying during your available access period.

After your access is confirmed, you can continue into the complete practice exam from this quiz flow.

Unless explicitly stated otherwise, this page provides independent practice material for study and exam preparation and is not the official examination itself.

Keep studying

Correct Answer:

Correct Answer:

Correct Answer:

Correct Answer:

Correct Answer:

About this Exam

Additional Information

Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Practice Questions - Fachanwalt SAV Strafrecht Avocat spécialiste FSA en droit pénal Exam

Frequently Asked Questions

Related Questions

Benin CAPA Practice Questions - Benin CAPA - Certificat d'Aptitude à la Profession d'Avocat Exam

Burkina Faso CFPA CAPA Practice Questions - Burkina Faso CFPA-BF CAPA - Certificat d'Aptitude à la Profession d'Avocat Exam

Cameroon Bar Exam Practice Questions - Cameroon Bar Pupilage Entrance Exam - Examen d'Aptitude au Stage d'Avocat (Cameroon) Exam

CAPA Avocat CI Practice Questions - CAPA - Certificat d'Aptitude à la Profession d'Avocat (Côte d'Ivoire) Exam

DR Congo CAPA Avocat Practice Questions - Certificat d'Aptitude Professionnelle (CAPA) - Épreuve de fin de stage d'avocat (DR Congo) Exam

Fachanwalt SAV Arbeitsrecht Practice Questions - Fachanwalt SAV Fachanwältin SAV Arbeitsrecht (Avocat spécialiste FSA droit du travail) Exam