Key legal question
Whether the complaint was admissible despite the missing attachment of the challenged decision.
Extracted holding
No; the defect was not cured within the court-set deadline, so the remedy was inadmissible.
Extracted reasoning
The Federal Court had required production of the appealed decision under Art. 42(5) BGG. The corrective order was deemed duly served under Art. 44(2) BGG even though uncollected, and the defect remained uncured. The complaint also manifestly failed to meet the formal requirements of Art. 42(1) and (2) BGG.