Key legal question
Whether the cantonal court wrongly designated the Federal Office for Health as a party instead of SUVA.
Extracted holding
The party designation was incorrect and had to be corrected; the judgment did not need to be set aside for lack of party standing.
Extracted reasoning
Only SUVA was addressed by the administrative decision, the objection decision, and the procedural notices; BAG had never been a participant, so the reference to BAG was merely an erroneous designation.