Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most current judgments of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and rulings. For the further judgments, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all judgments are available on the Lexplorer portal. There, you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your areas of law.
4A_186/2025: Judgment regarding eviction of tenants and legal protection in clear cases
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court assessed a complaint from tenants (B.A.________ and A.A.________) who opposed their eviction from a rented apartment. The landlord (B.________ Sàrl) terminated the rental agreement due to payment arrears and filed eviction requests, which were approved by the cantonal court of Fribourg. The tenants requested the Federal Court to overturn the judgment and grant free legal assistance for the appeal and federal court proceedings.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examined whether the complaint was admissible and found that the prerequisites for admitting the case were met, particularly the compliance with the complaint deadline and the achievement of the dispute value. The court applies the law ex officio but only considers objections insofar as they are precisely presented and substantiated. It bases its assessment on the facts established by the lower court and only accepts substantiated and reasoned criticism of the factual findings. In proceedings regarding legal protection in clear cases according to Art. 257 ZPO, the facts justifying the claim must be completely and immediately provable, and the legal situation must be clear. Based on the lower court, the defects claimed by the tenant regarding the rental property were not sufficiently proven. Therefore, the files showed that there was no clear offsetting claim. The termination of the rental agreement was deemed valid. The tenants' request for free legal assistance in the appeal proceedings was rejected by the lower court, as the legal requests were deemed hopeless. The Federal Court upheld this decision, as the tenants could not sufficiently refute the hopelessness of their legal requests. The request for free legal assistance for the federal court proceedings was also dismissed, as no sufficient prospects of success were demonstrated here either.
Summary of the Ruling
The complaint and the request for free legal assistance were dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on the complainants.
7B_412/2025: Order regarding the dismissal of a procedure due to withdrawal of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters against the order of the Cantonal Court of Zurich, III. Criminal Chamber, dated March 27, 2025. This complaint was withdrawn by submission on May 13, 2025.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The withdrawal of the complaint renders the proceedings moot. According to Art. 32 para. 2 BGG, the procedure is dismissed from the business directory. - **E.2:** Court costs amounting to CHF 200.00 are imposed on the complainant.
Summary of the Ruling
The proceedings are dismissed, and court costs are imposed.
2C_250/2023: Revocation of residence permit due to repeated criminal offenses
Summary of the Facts
The Serbian national A.________ lived in Switzerland since his early youth and held a residence permit. Due to numerous criminal convictions over several years, including offenses such as bodily harm, handling stolen goods, and multiple driving without a license, his residence permit was revoked and expulsion from Switzerland was ordered. A.________ ultimately opposed this decision before the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court admits the complaint insofar as it concerns the revocation of the residence permit, as there is generally a right to continue holding this permit, which is asserted in a reasonable manner. The expulsion, as far as separately challenged, is not considered. The Federal Court confirms that there is a serious violation of public safety and order that justifies the revocation. The long-standing and repeated delinquency, along with a lack of adjustment despite multiple warnings, showed that the complainant was not willing or able to comply with the legal order. The restrictive application of the dualism prohibition according to Art. 63 para. 3 AIG is confirmed: A waiver by the public prosecutor's office of an expulsion binds the administrative authorities not. The Migration Office was therefore entitled to revoke the residence permit. In balancing interests, the significant public interests in view of the complainant's delinquency are weighted higher than his private interests, including his long duration of stay and family ties in Switzerland. His reintegration into Serbia is deemed feasible, and the revocation is considered proportionate. The complaint is dismissed; the request for free legal assistance and representation is also denied due to lack of prospects for success.
Summary of the Ruling
The complaint and the request for free legal assistance are dismissed, and the court costs are imposed on the complainant.
2C_292/2024: Judgment regarding procurement in construction (Tunnel Las Ruinas)
Summary of the Facts
The Civil Engineering Office of the Canton of Graubünden awarded the master builder work for the "Tunnel Las Ruinas" in an open procedure. Subsequently, the second-placed A.________ AG filed a complaint and objected to the awarding method, particularly the evaluation of the suitability criteria and the award criteria. After the complaint was dismissed by the cantonal administrative court, A.________ AG turned to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_342/2025: Judgment on the decision of non-admission in an unemployment insurance matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainant opposed the temporary suspension of his unemployment benefits ordered by the Office for Industry, Trade and Labor Graubünden. This was based on the alleged violation of his duty to mitigate damages. The cantonal court confirmed the order. The complainant subsequently filed a complaint to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_107/2025: Judgment regarding short-time work compensation and reimbursement
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ SA received short-time work compensation during the COVID-19 pandemic from March 2020 to June 2021. Following a review by SECO, it was determined that the work time records for home office did not meet the legal requirements for verifiability and reliability. Furthermore, a different basis for calculating the regular working hours was applied. SECO therefore demanded the reimbursement of CHF 328'246.05. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed this decision, and A.________ SA subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1D_13/2025: Decision on the withdrawal of a legal remedy concerning the removal of the Vice-Syndic's function
Summary of the Facts
A.________, previously Vice-Syndic in Prilly, lost this function on December 16, 2024, due to an internal organizational measure of the municipality. His appeal against this removal was dismissed by the cantonal government of Vaud on February 12, 2025, due to lack of contestability. A.________ then submitted a subsidiary constitutional remedy to the Federal Court, which was filed on March 13, 2025. The legal representative of A.________ withdrew the legal remedy by letter on May 7, 2025.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_265/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint procedure in the area of compulsory health insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ opposed a decision of the Cantonal Court of Vaud regarding her membership in compulsory health insurance, which declared the proceedings completed due to her withdrawal. The Federal Court examined the present complaint and found that it was both insufficiently substantiated in content and submitted late.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_194/2025: Obligation to perform in the case of disability in occupational pension
Summary of the Facts
The respondent, A.________, was insured with two different pension institutions at times (BVK and AXA). Due to a mental illness, he was granted a full disability pension by the disability insurance in 2022. The dispute was about which pension institution is responsible for providing disability benefits according to the BVG. The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich obliged AXA to perform, against which it filed a complaint.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_320/2025: Complaint regarding federal and municipal taxes as well as direct federal tax, tax periods 2017-2019
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ AG filed a complaint against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne. This decision concerned the joining of procedures and the dismissal of a request for an extension of time to substantiate the complaint and the handling of a request for a stay of the complaint proceedings. A.________ AG requested the annulment of the interim decision and demanded an extension to supplement the complaint as well as further declaratory requests.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_666/2024: Judgment on expulsion and its entry in the Schengen Information System
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, a Moroccan national, was sentenced by the District Court of Dietikon to a prison sentence of 7 months and a stationary therapeutic measure for various offenses, including organized and commercial theft. In addition, an expulsion for 7 years and its entry in the Schengen Information System (SIS) was ordered. The Cantonal Court of Zurich confirmed these measures. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court, particularly against the expulsion and its entry in the SIS.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_461/2025: Non-admission of the complaint against pre-trial detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is accused of committing arson on January 27, 2025. Due to urgent suspicion and qualified risk of repetition, A.________ was placed in pre-trial detention by the coercive measures court of Berner Jura-Seeland. The detention period was extended multiple times, last until October 19, 2025. The Bernese High Court shortened this extension until July 19, 2025. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court to achieve immediate release from detention.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_352/2025: Non-admission of a complaint in the area of disability insurance
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court is dealing with a complaint against the judgment of the Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich dated April 16, 2025, which dealt with a re-registration for benefits from the disability insurance and the associated decision of non-admission by the IV Office Zurich. The complainant argues that his health condition and ability to work justify an examination. The Federal Court does not admit the complaint due to lack of justification.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_389/2024: Judgment on the right of reversion in hydropower concessions
Summary of the Facts
The Swiss Federal Railways SBB AG disputed with the Canton of Valais over the existence of a right of reversion to the facilities of the railway power plant Massaboden after the expiration of the hydropower concession on May 27, 2030. The SBB filed a lawsuit for negative determination of the right of reversion, which was dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Valais. The Federal Court dealt with the question of whether a right of reversion must be anchored in the concession or in cantonal law.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_224/2025: Challenge of the deletion of a company from the commercial register
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ opposed the deletion of B.________ GmbH from the commercial register, which was ordered by the Office for Commercial Register and Notaries of the Canton of St. Gallen. The background was that the company no longer had any realizable assets. The Cantonal Court of St. Gallen dismissed the complaint procedure, as the complainant had not paid the advance costs. Before the Federal Court, the complainant complained about the decision of the Cantonal Court but did not provide sufficient justification.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_256/2025: Decision regarding the deadline for the advance payment of court costs
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ and B.A.________ filed a legal remedy on May 9, 2025, against a decision of the Cour de justice of the Canton of Geneva. The Federal Court repeatedly requested them to make an advance payment of the court costs. A final deadline for payment until June 16, 2025, was not met, and a request for extension was made after this deadline.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_514/2025: Decision on treatment without consent
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was taken into care by the KESB Nordbünden. The medical management of the B.________ clinic ordered treatment without consent. A.________ filed a complaint against this decision with the High Court of the Canton of Graubünden, which did not consider the complaint in a decision dated June 5, 2025. The subsequent complaint directed to the Federal Court was submitted on June 26, 2025.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_515/2024: Judgment on the municipal right of pre-emption
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ SA purchased a parcel (No. 648) in Vevey with three buildings and 34 apartments from B.________ SA, as well as a partial co-ownership unit (No. 649-1) for parking spaces. The purchase price amounted to 12,800,000 CHF. On September 1, 2023, the municipality of Vevey exercised its legally established right of pre-emption according to the Vaud legislation to promote rental housing (LPPPL) to create affordable housing (LUP). After unsuccessful cantonal legal remedies, A.________ SA turned to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_367/2025: Decision on the procedural requirement in connection with disability insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zug, which denied his claims for benefits from disability insurance. The cantonal court based its assessment in particular on a statement from the Regional Medical Service (RAD).
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_443/2024: Decision on the helplessness compensation of a minor insured person
Summary of the Facts
The child A.A.________, born in 2016, suffers from a birth defect (neonatal ileus) and must be nourished parenterally. The IV Office of the Canton of Thurgau initially granted her helplessness compensation for moderate helplessness as well as an intensive care allowance. Due to subsequent changes, the allowance was removed and the helplessness compensation was last reduced to light helplessness. The complaint against this reduction was dismissed by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Thurgau. A.A.________ requested the Federal Court to restore the original classification.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_532/2024: Decision on re-registration with disability insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ repeatedly registered with the disability insurance for benefits. After several previous decisions, including withdrawal of a pension and rejection of applications, the IV Office Solothurn lastly rejected the entry into a new application with a decision dated October 26, 2023. The cantonal court dismissed the complaint against this decision. Before the Federal Court, A.________ requested a substantive examination of his new application, based on allegedly newly submitted medical reports.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_47/2025: Judgment on the alleged contamination of delivered materials
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (A.________ S.A.) delivered limestone to the respondent (B.________ AG) and accepted a soil-stone mixture in return. She claimed that the mixture was contaminated with calcium oxide and caused concrete flaking. The lower court dismissed the claim as there was no evidence of the alleged contamination.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.