Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present comprehensive summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the other judgments, you will find a summary of the facts. 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.
9C_285/2025: Judgment on the admissibility of an appeal regarding free legal aid in administrative proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The IV Office of Solothurn denied the insured party free legal aid in administrative proceedings. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Solothurn overturned the decision of the IV Office and referred the matter back to the administration for further examination and a new decision. The IV Office then appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1**: The Federal Court examines the admissibility of the appeal ex officio and with free cognition. It found that the lower court did not conclude the proceedings with its decision but rather made an interim decision that referred the matter back to the administration for further examination.
- **E.2**: According to Art. 93 BGG, interim decisions can only be challenged if there is a risk of irreparable harm (para. 1 lit. a) or if a final decision can be immediately reached (para. 1 lit. b). The IV Office could not demonstrate such harm, and the second condition is not applicable.
- **E.3**: The Federal Court emphasizes that the exception for independent appeal against interim decisions is applied restrictively. The reasons presented by the IV Office do not meet this requirement.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Court did not admit the appeal and did not impose any court costs.
8C_537/2024: Cancellation of IV benefits and claim for reimbursement
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, who had been receiving a full disability pension and an allowance for helplessness since 2006, was accused of having improperly received benefits after a lengthy review of the disability insurance (IV) and medical and observational clarifications. This resulted in the cancellation of the benefit-awarding decisions from 2006, the suspension of benefits, and a demand for reimbursement of CHF 122,645. The cantonal administrative court confirmed the decision of the IV Office, after which the appellant appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
E.1: A second exchange of submissions did not take place. The appellant did not respond to the statement of the IV Office. E.2: The Federal Court examines legal aspects ex officio, while the facts are only corrected in cases of obvious incorrectness or legal violations. E.3: Disputed points include the cancellation of the pension decision, the denial of further IV benefits, and the claim for reimbursement of improperly received benefits. E.4: The legal basis for reconsideration and for the reimbursement of improperly received benefits, as well as the admissibility of observational material, is appropriately explained by the lower court. E.5: The lower court stated that the original decisions from 2006 were undoubtedly incorrect and based on a violation of the principle of investigation. A decision is made based on reconsideration. E.6: The cantonal court rightly determined that neither disability nor helplessness existed. The cancellation of benefits ex nunc et pro futuro is justified. E.7: The claim for reimbursement of improperly received benefits was partially approved by the Federal Court. Due to a lack of clarity regarding the issue of retroactive cancellation of benefits, the matter is referred back to the lower court for renewed examination. E.8: Court costs and party compensation are to be shared equally between the appellant and the appellee.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Court dismissed the appeal against the suspension of benefits, partially approved the reimbursement claim, and referred the matter back to the lower court for renewed examination.
6B_23/2025: Judgment regarding defense rights in criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.A. was convicted by the criminal judge of the Republic and Canton of Jura for several violations of cantonal laws (protection of nature and landscape, building regulations) and municipal regulations. She carried out work that significantly affected the landscape protection area, despite an official order to immediately stop the work. The criminal court and later the cantonal criminal chamber confirmed the conviction. A.A. appealed and requested a defense as well as the annulment of the cantonal judgment.
Summary of the Considerations
- E.1: The proceedings are conducted in the language of the contested judgment (French), even though the appellant is proceeding in German. - E.2.1: The appellant complains of a lack of defense according to Art. 130 lit. d CPP. She argues that the cantonal authorities violated their duty to provide her with a public defender, as the prosecutor was present before the criminal judge and the cantonal criminal chamber. - E.2.1.2: The Federal Court states that the principle of "equality of arms" was violated since the appellant had to act without a defender while the prosecutor personally represented the accusation. The cantonal authorities should have provided a defender according to Art. 130 lit. d and Art. 131 CPP. This violation justifies a re-examination of the case. - E.2.2: The further complaints of the appellant are rendered moot due to the established violation of defense rights.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was upheld, the judgment annulled, and the matter referred back for a new decision.
4F_16/2025: Request for revision regarding employment contract
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ was unsuccessful in her lawsuit against B.________ SA before the labor court and the cantonal authorities based on an employment contract. The Federal Court had previously (judgment of March 12, 2025, 4A_113/2025) declared her legal remedy inadmissible due to a lack of fulfillment of the statutory justification requirements. In the present request dated May 22, 2025, she requests the revision of this Federal Court judgment, referring to allegedly new facts regarding possible bias of a judge at the labor court and other alleged procedural defects. She also requested free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_468/2023: Judgment regarding admission to a doctoral program at the University of Zurich
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ was admitted to the doctoral program "Biomedical Ethics and Law / Law Track" in 2010 and enrolled in the spring semester of 2011 at the University of Zurich. Following a recommendation from the doctoral committee in 2016 not to continue her dissertation, her enrollment expired at the end of the fall semester of 2017. Due to non-payment of the semester fees, she was removed from the list of students in the fall semester of 2018. The appellant requested a decision regarding her exclusion from the program. The University of Zurich ultimately recognized that she was no longer a participant in the program. Both internal bodies and the administrative court rejected her complaints, after which she filed a public law appeal with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_696/2024: Judgment regarding prohibition of file release
Summary of the Facts
In the present case, the youth public prosecutor's office of Unterland is conducting a criminal investigation against A.________ (born 2008) for attempted murder, in which a Jewish Orthodox victim was gravely injured. In addition to pre-trial detention, the youth public prosecutor's office requested that the official defense be prohibited from making the detention files available to A.________ and his legal representative. This was decided by the coercive measures court and confirmed by the cantonal instance. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_745/2024: Consideration of a cohabitation contribution in the area of social assistance
Summary of the Facts
A dispute between A.________ and the municipality of Merenschwand concerns the consideration of a cohabitation contribution in the social assistance budget. While the municipality did not grant A.________ any social assistance, she argued that the consideration of her cohabitation partner's income violated federal and international law. The administrative court of the canton of Aargau partially confirmed this practice, which is why A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_130/2025: Decision regarding missed deadlines in de-sealing procedures
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was confronted with a search of his home in the context of a criminal investigation for suspected fraud, during which various electronic storage devices were seized and sealed. The public prosecutor later requested the unsealing. The cantonal coercive measures court dismissed the unsealing procedure as irrelevant because A.________ failed to provide a statement within the legally prescribed deadline of ten days. A.________ denied having received the order and subsequently brought the matter before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_221/2025: Decision regarding the claim for an allowance for helplessness
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________, born in 1970 and a recipient of a full disability pension, applied for an allowance for helplessness on August 16, 2022. The responsible cantonal disability insurance office conducted an investigation at the insured's residence and denied the claim with a decision dated February 21, 2024. The cantonal insurance court of the canton of Vaud dismissed the appeal against the decision on March 20, 2025, which was subsequently challenged before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_402/2025: Decision on the formal inadmissibility of an appeal in criminal matters
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an appeal in criminal matters against a judgment of the Chambre pénale d'appel et de révision of the Cour de justice of the Canton of Geneva dated March 14, 2025. In this cantonal decision, B.________ was acquitted of the charges of theft of movable property and damage to property. Furthermore, A.________ was ordered to bear a substantial part of the procedural costs and to pay compensation to B.________ for his defense costs. The Federal Court had to decide on the formal admissibility of the appeal.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_863/2024: Appeal against conviction for forging official value stamps and referral to the lower court
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was initially acquitted by the District Court of Rheinfelden of the charge of forgery of official value stamps. On appeal by the public prosecutor, the High Court of the Canton of Aargau attributed guilt to him for this act, as he had repeatedly affixed a highway vignette with double-sided adhesive tape and later with "permanent adhesive" to the windshield of his vehicle. This manipulation, in the opinion of the High Court, constituted the offense of forgery according to Art. 245 para. 1 StGB. A.________ contends that he had no malicious intent and that the legal situation was unclear.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_26/2025: Judgment regarding various criminal accusations and environmental protection regulations
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ was convicted at the lower court level for a variety of offenses, including violence or threats against authorities and officials, defamation, violations of laws on environmental and landscape protection, as well as other cantonal and federal legal provisions. A penalty of monetary payment and an outpatient treatment concept was ordered. The cantonal instance partially reduced the penalty and lifted the obligation to undergo outpatient therapy. A.A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court, requesting his acquittal, compensation for unlawful detention, and a re-evaluation of previous decisions.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_118/2025: Decision regarding the annulment of a facilitated naturalization
Summary of the Facts
A.________, originally a foreign national, was granted residency in Switzerland through family reunification after marrying a Swiss citizen. She later applied for facilitated naturalization, which was approved by the SEM on January 12, 2022. After her separation and subsequent divorce, which occurred shortly after the naturalization was granted, the SEM initiated proceedings to annul the naturalization. The SEM and later the TAF concluded that the conditions for facilitated naturalization were not met due to the quick dissolution of the marriage and that A.________ had made false statements.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_454/2025: Federal Court decision regarding jurisdiction for an appeal against a telephone surveillance measure
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court assesses the admissibility of a direct legal remedy against a decision of the cantonal court for coercive measures in the Canton of Bern, which did not approve the surveillance of telecommunications. The decision was forwarded from the Bernese court to the Federal Court after the cantonal criminal chamber denied its jurisdiction.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_746/2024: Compensation for free legal representation in social assistance appeal
Summary of the Facts
The legal representative Tobias Hobi contested the determination of his compensation for free legal representation in the cantonal proceedings against the SPG appeal authority. The cantonal court decided to set the compensation at CHF 2,400, which represents a reduction of the submitted fee note of CHF 3,408.90. The legal representative argued that the fee reduction was unreasonable and prevented cost-covering work for non-profit organizations.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_184/2025: Judgment regarding mandatory expulsion in drug-related criminal law
Summary of the Facts
In the dispute over the expulsion of a North Macedonian citizen who has lived in Switzerland for over 37 years, the Federal Court confirms the lower court's order for a seven-year expulsion. The appellant was convicted of qualified drug trafficking (600 grams of pure cocaine) and sentenced to 28 months' imprisonment. The lower court affirms a severe personal hardship case but weighs the public safety interests higher than the personal interests of the appellant, especially considering his behavior and the risk of recidivism.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_729/2024: Judgment regarding an appeal concerning reinstatement in an accident insurance case
Summary of the Facts
The appellant reported a relapse to Suva in 2022 regarding an accident from 2017. Suva denied liability, as no causal connection to the accident event could be established. The cantonal court did not enter the submission due to late appeal. The appellant requested reinstatement of the deadline and the granting of insurance benefits before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_860/2024: Decision not to enter regarding enforcement
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an appeal against the enforcement decision of the youth public prosecutor's office of Basel-Landschaft dated June 11, 2024. This was rejected by the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft, Criminal Law Division, as it did not meet the legal requirements. The appellant then turned to the Federal Court without submitting adequate reasoning.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_192/2025: Judgment regarding the order of an expulsion
Summary of the Facts
A.________ (Greek national) was found guilty of crime and offense against the narcotics law (BetmG) for having acquired, resold, and consumed cocaine in significant quantities between 2018 and 2020. The District Court of Rheintal sentenced him to a conditional prison sentence of 24 months, a fine of CHF 150, and ordered a five-year expulsion. The appeal to the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen was unsuccessful, noting a violation of the acceleration principle. A.________ filed a criminal appeal, primarily seeking the annulment of the expulsion.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_298/2025: Judgment regarding murder, threats, arbitrariness, sentencing, and expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The appellant was convicted by the District Court of Zurich for murder (Art. 112 StGB) and threats (Art. 180 para. 1 and 2 lit. a StGB). He was subsequently sentenced to 20 years of imprisonment, a 15-year expulsion, and an entry in the Schengen Information System (SIS). The incident involved the targeted and planned killing of his wife on October 13, 2021, after he had stalked her severely and went to her residence with a knife despite a restraining and contact ban. The lower court's convictions and sentences were confirmed by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_1288/2023: Judgment regarding gross violations of traffic rules and conducting traffic controls
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ is accused of having massively violated the prescribed safety distance to the vehicle in front over a stretch of approximately 1,300 meters on the A2 motorway on October 17, 2019. The measured distances of 16.0 meters or 0.57 seconds and 14.4 meters or 0.48 seconds at speeds of over 100 km/h led to a conviction for gross violation of traffic rules according to Art. 90 para. 2 SVG.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_874/2023: Judgment regarding multiple defamation
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, an heir and participant in an estate case, sent several emails to various recipients in 2017 and 2018, accusing the two appointed executors of defamatory and polemical statements. The allegations included intrigues, corruption, and bias. This led to a criminal conviction for multiple defamation by the Criminal Court of the Canton of Basel-Stadt, which was later confirmed by the Appeals Court. The appellant sought acquittal and dismissal of civil claims before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.