RF
Person dossier · profession and register status
Raphael Fisch
This profile shows publicly documented roles, dates and sources. Historical information is kept separate from current roles.
Current evidence
Evidence-based procedural chronology
Party allegation ≠ factual finding
This chronology separates party allegations, counsel submissions, evidence, counter-evidence, institutional responses and outcomes. Procedural effect does not amount to confirmation that an allegation is true.
Rejected by courtParty allegation in representation context
Parenting-capacity allegations – later expressly rejected as unproven
Procedural context: Protective measures proceedings 2023
- Submission / request
- The decision records allegations by the party represented by Raphael Fisch questioning the father’s parenting capacity, including suspected narcissistic traits, a need for recognition and control. The record proves the representation context, not that every phrase was personally authored by Fisch.
- Evidence status
- The court assessed the allegations against the party submissions and the available case record. Court record / decision
- Counter-evidence / context
- The court found no indications from the care history and personal questioning that the father’s parenting capacity was impaired.
- Institutional response
- The court addressed the allegations on the merits. Rejected on the merits
- Outcome / status
- The parenting-capacity allegations were classified as not sufficiently substantiated, evidenced or proven and as mere assertions rather than a professional assessment. Both parents were described as loving, committed and fully capable of parenting.
- Record source
- District Court Münchwilen · protective-measures decision of 17 November 2023 · Entscheid 17.11.2023, Erwägungen S. 15–16
Procedural effect onlyApplication in representation context
Superprovisional application on handover, contact and maintenance
Procedural context: Protective measures proceedings 2023
- Submission / request
- The party represented by Fisch requested, among other things, immediate return of the child, a narrower contact schedule and interim payments; police assistance for the handover was also requested if necessary.
- Evidence status
- The requests and the superprovisional decision are documented in the later court decision. Court record / decision
- Counter-evidence / context
- The father responded within the deadline and requested a different care arrangement.
- Institutional response
- The court provisionally ordered a handover/contact arrangement and gave the father a short period to respond. Interim / provisional effect
- Outcome / status
- The interim procedural effect did not confirm the earlier allegations of parental incapacity. The final decision expressly found the father fully capable of parenting.
- Record source
- District Court Münchwilen · protective-measures decision of 17 November 2023 · Entscheid 17.11.2023, Prozessgeschichte S. 9–10
DisputedCounsel submission
Fisch sought full dismissal of the maintenance modification
Procedural context: Provisional measures / maintenance modification 2025
- Submission / request
- On behalf of his client, Fisch requested full dismissal of the superprovisional measures and the modification of the protective-measures decision, disputing in particular a sufficiently material financial change and irreparable prejudice.
- Evidence status
- The filing relied especially on the 2023 decision and the then available information on income, unemployment and needs. Partly supported by documents
- Counter-evidence / context
- The father relied on later deterioration in actual ability to pay, exhaustion of benefits and enforcement risks.
- Institutional response
- The filing became part of the proceeding and was served for information/response. Served / response permitted
- Outcome / status
- This is a documented legal and factual position by counsel; filing it does not constitute judicial confirmation of every premise.
- Record source
- SteuriFisch AG · submission of 13 October 2025 · Stellungnahme 13.10.2025, S. 1–5
Procedural effect onlyCounsel submission
Application for direct instruction to employer or social-insurance payer
Procedural context: Debtor instruction 2025
- Submission / request
- On behalf of his client, Fisch requested that the employer or competent social-insurance payer transfer the adjudicated maintenance directly, relying on reduced or partly missing payments.
- Evidence status
- The filing referred to the protective-measures decision, payment information and other case records. Partly supported by documents
- Counter-evidence / context
- A maintenance-modification proceeding concerning the father’s current ability to pay was pending in parallel.
- Institutional response
- The district court opened a separate debtor-instruction proceeding and exchanged submissions. Served / response permitted
- Outcome / status
- The application documents an enforcement position. It does not by itself establish personal unreliability or moral misconduct by the father.
- Record source
- SteuriFisch AG · debtor-instruction application of 13 October 2025 · Gesuch um Schuldneranweisung 13.10.2025, S. 1–4
Procedural effect onlyCounsel oral submission
Oral submission on finances, earlier remedies and a criminal complaint
Procedural context: Main and settlement hearing 2026
- Submission / request
- In the recorded oral submission, Fisch maintained the October 2025 filings and stated that the father had challenged the 2023 decision up to the Federal Supreme Court and had filed a criminal complaint against Fisch and the client which was not taken up.
- Evidence status
- The wording is attributed to Fisch as “RAF” in the court hearing protocol. Court record / decision
- Counter-evidence / context
- A decision not to take up a criminal complaint is procedurally distinct from a merits finding about the underlying allegations.
- Institutional response
- The submission was made and recorded at the main hearing. Addressed at hearing
- Outcome / status
- What is established is that Fisch advanced these points in argument. No separate finding about motives, character or truth beyond the expressly stated procedural results follows.
- Record source
- District Court Wil · hearing protocol of 19 March 2026 · Verhandlungsprotokoll 19.03.2026, Parteivorträge RAF
DisputedCounsel submission
Broad assertion that reliable communication and cooperation were absent
Procedural context: Provisional measures / child-protection track 2026
- Submission / request
- The Fisch-signed short submission stated that reliable communication and cooperation between the parents had not existed since separation and that agreements failed or were later reversed by the father.
- Evidence status
- Holiday correspondence was cited as an example; the attachments also contained childcare and financial documents. Counter-evidence present
- Counter-evidence / context
- The father submitted messages documenting concrete coordination on school mail, a paediatric appointment, vaccination, hearing/vision tests and kindergarten. They do not prove conflict-free communication but contradict the absolute proposition that concrete coordination never occurs.
- Institutional response
- The court served the submission and attachments, allowed a response and included child-protection questions in the announced written-decision track. Additional procedural track opened
- Outcome / status
- The allegation remains disputed. The documented procedural effect must not be confused with judicial confirmation of its truth.
- Record source
- SteuriFisch AG · short submission of 14 July 2026 / counter-submission of 24 July 2026 · Kurzstellungnahme 14.07.2026, S. 1–3; Gegenstellungnahme 24.07.2026, S. 5–6
Open / not adjudicatedCounsel submission
Far-reaching child-burden allegations with no expert report in the attachment list
Procedural context: Provisional measures / child-protection track 2026
- Submission / request
- Fisch requested a contact-right curatorship and psychological assessment/support. The submission contained extensive allegations about the child’s alleged burden, the father’s conduct at medical appointments and in the parental conflict, plus further alleged incidents to be disclosed only to the child-protection authority.
- Evidence status
- The nine listed attachments consisted of insurance, family allowances, childcare contract/tariffs/invoices, holiday correspondence and a wage statement; no psychological, psychiatric or authority expert report appears in that list. No expert assessment in attachment list
- Counter-evidence / context
- The father disputed a concrete child-endangerment situation and requested full right to be heard and a clear factual/procedural basis before intrusive measures.
- Institutional response
- The submission was served and the court announced written consideration of child-protection measures. The later holiday decision of 7 September 2026 did not decide these July allegations on the merits. Additional procedural track opened
- Outcome / status
- On the reviewed record, these remain party/counsel allegations. The later holiday record reviewed here contains no judicial confirmation of the alleged facts.
- Record source
- SteuriFisch AG · short submission of 14 July 2026 / District Court Wil · later procedural record · Kurzstellungnahme 14.07.2026, S. 2–3; Fisch-Beilagen 1–9
Procedural effect onlyProcedural statement
Waiver of further submission while relying on earlier filings
Procedural context: Holiday arrangements 2026
- Submission / request
- After consulting his client, Fisch stated that no further submission would be filed, relied on the previous filings and requested a prompt decision.
- Evidence status
- The separate letter of 28 August 2026 exists and is recorded as a procedural step in the decision of 7 September 2026. Court record / decision
- Counter-evidence / context
- The waiver concerned the holiday proceeding and does not show that earlier child-protection allegations were confirmed or withdrawn.
- Institutional response
- The court subsequently decided the autumn and Christmas holiday blocks. Addressed at hearing
- Outcome / status
- The holiday decision fixed concrete holiday periods. It contains no merits finding confirming the serious child-protection allegations from 14 July 2026.
- Record source
- SteuriFisch AG · letter of 28 August 2026 / District Court Wil · decision of 7 September 2026 · Schreiben 28.08.2026; Ferienentscheid 07.09.2026, S. 5 und 11