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 you with detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and rulings. For the remaining 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.
5A_542/2025: Judgment on the enforcement request and request for recusal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an enforcement request with the enforcement office of the Solothurn region against the enforcement office of Grenchen-Bettlach, which was dismissed due to abuse of rights. Additionally, he submitted a request for recusal against various employees of the lower court. The Cantonal Court of Solothurn did not consider the request for recusal, dismissed the appeal, and imposed procedural costs of CHF 300 on the appellant. The appellant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court, along with a new request for recusal against six federal judges.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** According to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG, a precise statement of reasons for the complaint is required, detailing the legal violations. The appellant does not meet this requirement. - **E.2:** The request for recusal against all federal judges is abusive and lacks a valid justification. - **E.3:** The lower court rightly determined that the repeated complaints of the appellant were querulous and abusive of rights. - **E.4:** The appellant has once again made statements that violate decorum, which could lead to a possible fine in future proceedings. - **E.5:** The complaint is obviously inadmissible and is dismissed in a simplified procedure (Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b and c BGG).
Summary of the Ruling
The request for recusal and the complaint were not addressed, and court costs were imposed.
8C_138/2024: Credit for a cohabitation contribution within the framework of social welfare
Summary of the Facts
A.________ applied for social welfare from the municipality of Volketswil. A cohabitation contribution from the IV pensions and supplementary benefits of his partner was credited against the support. Following partial approval by the District Council of Uster, A.________ appealed to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, which was dismissed. The crediting of the cohabitation contribution remained disputed.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The complaint can be filed due to legal violations according to Art. 95 and 96 BGG. The review of an arbitrary application of the law is permitted. - **E.2:** The dispute concerns whether the appellant is entitled to higher social welfare benefits. It needs to be clarified whether the crediting of the cohabitation contribution is in accordance with the constitution and federal law. - **E.3:** Social welfare is based on the principle of subsidiarity. The income of the cohabiting partner can be considered according to practice and SKOS guidelines. The lower court correctly justified the delegation of legislative powers. - **E.4:** Credits based on a stable cohabitation do not contradict the principle of equal treatment, as it aims at the actually lived solidarity and considers the fundamental idea of social welfare. - **E.5:** Also, supplementary benefits of the non-supported partner can be considered within the framework of social welfare without violating federal law. The subsidiary concept of social welfare justifies the consideration of other income, including supplementary benefits. - **E.6:** The complaint is dismissed as the case law regarding the crediting of cohabitation contributions and supplementary benefits continues.
Summary of the Ruling
The complaint is dismissed and free legal aid is granted. Court costs are imposed on the appellant, but temporarily charged to the Federal Court.
9C_664/2024: Assessment of tax consideration for depreciation on collective capital investments
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court dealt with the question of whether depreciation on a property, which was recorded in the tax periods 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 in accordance with commercial law but not claimed in the corresponding tax returns, can be subsequently considered for tax purposes in a later tax period (2018/2019). A.________ AG, as the fund management of a real estate fund, argued based on the total profit principle, while the cantonal tax office of Zurich and the Federal Court emphasized the principle of periodicity and rejected tax consideration.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1:** The Federal Court examines jurisdiction and admissibility requirements with free cognition. It affirms the general admissibility requirements for the complaint.
**E.2:** The focus is on the limited tax liability of the fund in the Canton of Zurich (§ 56 para. 1 lit. c StG/ZH) and the recognition of out-of-canton losses. The contentious point is the tax treatment of the depreciations recorded in the business years 2014/2015 and 2015/2016.
**E.3:** The Federal Court confirms the accounting commercial law violation of booking acquisition costs above the market value when switching to the OR accounts (2016/2017) and the success-effective depreciation of already periodized depreciations. The correct reporting of losses should have occurred in earlier years.
**E.4:** The total profit principle does not apply, as the omitted reporting of depreciations has established the legal force of the assessments 2014/2015 and 2015/2016. There is no right to subsequent consideration.
Summary of the Ruling
The complaint has been upheld and the previous decision of the Administrative Court has been overturned.
5A_81/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint regarding the compensation of a lawyer as official defender
Summary of the Facts
A lawyer, who was working as an official defender in the Canton of Fribourg, requested a higher compensation for her work in a visitation rights procedure. The attorney fees were generally set at CHF 1,500 in the cantonal appeal procedure, without considering a detailed cost list. The lawyer filed a complaint with the Federal Court to increase the amount of compensation.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_344/2025: Inadmissibility of the revocation of the driver's license due to lack of psychological fitness assessment
Summary of the Facts
The cantonal traffic authority of the Canton of Fribourg revoked A.________'s driver's license due to a speeding violation and made the reinstatement of the driver's license contingent upon the submission of a psychological report. After the report was not submitted within the set deadline, the driver's license was revoked indefinitely, but for a minimum of 24 months. This decision was confirmed by the III. Administrative Court Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Fribourg and was ultimately challenged before the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_446/2025: Complaint concerning denied suspensive effect against an enforcement decision of the lower court
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ objected to the decision of the Chambre des poursuites et faillites of the Cantonal Court of Fribourg dated June 6, 2025, which denied the suspensive effect of her complaint against a payment order served to her by the enforcement office of Sarine on May 14, 2025. She additionally requested free legal aid.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_77/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint regarding party compensation
Summary of the Facts
The lower court, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, had ruled on November 28, 2024, among other things, to award A.________ a party compensation of CHF 2,000 for the administrative court proceedings. The appellant filed a complaint with the Federal Court and requested an adjustment of the party compensation considering the actual costs incurred. A dispute arose regarding the timeliness of the complaint.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_20/2025: Building permit in Champéry
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ opposed a building permit for the construction of a chalet on the parcel of the respondent B.________ in the municipality of Champéry. Main points of contention were the legal and technical suitability of the access road to the parcel as well as alleged violations of the right to be heard. The lower court dismissed the complaint, and the Federal Court confirmed this assessment.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_270/2023: Judgment regarding the accusation of defamation and the revocation of a previous suspension of sentence
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was partially convicted by the lower courts for criminal offenses, including attempted coercion and failure to comply with an official order. The previously granted suspension of sentence was revoked. He filed a complaint to contest these decisions, including the imposed sanctions and the payment of moral compensation to B.________.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_950/2024: Inadmissibility of a complaint against conviction for obstruction of public interest services and other offenses
Summary of the Facts
Two individuals, A.________ and B.________, participated in a non-approved demonstration organized by the group Extinction Rebellion. This significantly disrupted traffic on the Pont Bessières bridge in Lausanne on September 20, 2019. The participants blocked traffic routes and set up objects such as staging materials and suspected marijuana. The action led to significant delays in public transport and required police intervention. A.________ and B.________ were convicted of various offenses, including obstruction of public interest services under Art. 239 StGB and traffic regulation violations under Art. 90 para. 1 SVG.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_115/2025: Judgment on the inadmissibility of a complaint related to the definitive legal opening and free legal aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern, which refused the definitive legal opening for CHF 1,000.-- as well as free legal aid for the lower court and the complaint proceedings.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_321/2025: Judgment on the inadmissibility and non-admission decision
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a criminal complaint against several members of the Lucerne police for various offenses. The Public Prosecutor's Office of Sursee decided on August 28, 2024, not to pursue the criminal proceedings. The Cantonal Court of Lucerne did not consider the complaints submitted against this decision, prompting the appellant to file a complaint with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_411/2024: Decision on questions regarding the exequatur of an Italian payment order
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court had to decide on the complaint of A.________ SA against the decision of the II. Civil Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Ticino from June 6, 2024, which confirmed the enforceability of an Italian payment order and a related court-confirmed decision in Switzerland (exequatur). The payment order and the subsequent Italian court decision relate to a monetary claim of B.________ S.r.l. against A.________ SA, based in Lugano.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_100/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint due to non-payment of the cost advance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a complaint on June 3, 2025, against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft of the same date, which did not consider her complaint due to non-payment of the cost advance. The Federal Court examined the admissibility of the submission and concluded that the complaint did not meet the requirements for a subsidiary constitutional complaint due to insufficient justification.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_86/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint due to missing cost advance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a GmbH, filed a complaint against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Valais, which did not consider her complaint regarding the granting of definitive legal opening for CHF 200.-- and CHF 90.--. The Federal Court demanded the payment of a cost advance, which was neither paid by the appellant within the original deadline nor in the set additional period.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_566/2025: Decision on a complaint against the non-admission in a mutual legal assistance procedure
Summary of the Facts
The appellant opposed a legally enforced asset seizure by the Zurich bankruptcy office, which was based on a German insolvency procedure. The District Court of Zurich did not consider his original complaint, nor did the Cantonal Court of Zurich later. The appellant raised before the Federal Court, among other things, the violation of the right to be heard and disputed his insolvency, but left the points relevant to the current procedure unsubstantiated.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_298/2025: Order of the Federal Court regarding free legal aid and dismissal of the proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The appellant contested a decision by the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen, which rejected a request for free legal aid and deemed the appeal process as not to be admitted. After another decision by the Cantonal Court, the appellant accepted the outcome and withdrew her complaint with the Federal Court. In the Federal Court proceedings, she again requested free legal aid, which was addressed in the context of the dismissal of the proceedings.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_349/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint regarding search and seizure
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of Lenzburg-Aarau conducted a criminal investigation against A.________ on suspicion of violating the secret or private sphere through recording devices according to Art. 179quater StGB. In this context, a search and seizure were ordered, during which mobile phones as well as incidental findings such as imitation weapons and suspected marijuana were seized. The Cantonal Court of Aargau dismissed A.________'s complaint against the search and seizure order, to the extent that it considered it. A.________ then filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_384/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaints in an international mutual legal assistance case
Summary of the Facts
The Latvian authorities requested Swiss authorities for mutual legal assistance in a criminal case regarding money laundering. The focus was on information and documents regarding convicted tax offenses and money laundering proceedings in which A.A.________ was allegedly involved. The Cantonal Public Prosecutor's Office of Lucerne ordered the release of relevant documents to the Latvian authorities. The decision was challenged before the Federal Criminal Court and, ultimately, the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_199/2023: Judgment on the building permit for a model airfield
Summary of the Facts
The model airfield is located in a protected landscape and water zone. Over the years, the use and infrastructure of the site had been intensified without a building permit. In the context of objections and complaints, the Administrative Court stated that the model airfield was not compatible with applicable law and that no permit could be granted.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_116/2025: Judgment regarding definitive legal opening and free legal aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a complaint against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern, which confirmed the granting of definitive legal opening and the refusal of free legal aid. At the same time, the Cantonal Court dismissed the request for free legal aid for the complaint proceedings. The appellant lodged a complaint with the Federal Court against this decision.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_299/2025: Proceedings concerning the suspension of visitation rights and free legal aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ objected to the decision of the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen, which suspended the visitation rights between father and son and split the procedural costs equally between the parties. She requested from the Federal Court, among other things, the annulment of the cost regulation in the cantonal decision and the granting of free legal aid for the proceedings before the Cantonal Court and before the Federal Court. After a temporary suspension of the Federal Court proceedings due to the outstanding question of free legal aid before the Cantonal Court, the appellant withdrew her complaint after the Cantonal Court subsequently granted her free legal aid.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_387/2025: Authorization for a criminal proceeding against employees of the AVSV
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint against two employees of the Office for Consumer Protection and Veterinary Affairs of the Canton of St. Gallen (AVSV) for various alleged offenses related to the inspections of their animal husbandry. The indictment chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen refused authorization to initiate criminal proceedings with a decision dated June 5, 2025.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_544/2023: Judgment on sexual coercion and expulsion from the country
Summary of the Facts
The Portuguese-Guinean appellant A.________ was convicted by the District Court and the cantonal appeal instance for sexual coercion and other offenses. He received a prison sentence of 13 months and was ordered to be expelled from the country for 5 years. A.________ denied the allegations and filed a complaint with the Federal Court, arguing particularly against the conviction for sexual coercion and his expulsion from the country.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_361/2025: Non-admission of a complaint regarding the revocation of a provisional driver's license
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a complaint against a judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn, which concerned the revocation of his provisional driver's license. The Federal Court initially received a formally invalid submission by email. The complaint submitted by post within the deadline also had a formal defect, as it was not personally signed. Despite a deadline set to remedy the defect, along with a delivery fiction, no correction took place, which is why the Federal Court did not admit the complaint.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_32/2025: Sanction due to disciplinary measures in a correctional facility
Summary of the Facts
A.________, who has been incarcerated since January 9, 2023, was sanctioned with three days in solitary confinement on April 23, 2024, for attempting to attack a fellow inmate. The altercation began as a joking act but escalated into physical violence. Since his incarceration, A.________ has been subjected to a total of eight disciplinary measures. The lower court confirmed the sanction. A.________ requested the Federal Court to lift it and sought damages, as well as the hearing of witnesses.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_652/2024: Judgment on the claim for default interest on AHV contributions
Summary of the Facts
The appellants, A.________ and B.________, are partners of a GmbH and were registered as self-employed by the Hotela compensation fund. In 2019, their trustee reported a large profit from self-employment to the compensation fund and inquired about default interest as well as a possible prepayment. The compensation fund informed that a report could be made until the end of 2020 and that default interest would be calculated from 2021. Based on the tax data from 2020, high AHV contributions for 2019 were subsequently imposed, including default interest. Objections as well as the complaints before the Cantonal Court of Valais were dismissed.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_127/2025: Decision on the tax consideration of support payments to children living abroad
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ and B.A.________, both taxable in the Canton of Lucerne, applied for child deductions for the tax period 2022 for two adult, financially supported children in Turkey. However, the tax office granted only a support deduction and rejected the child deductions of CHF 12,500 each. After an objection, support-related deductions totaling CHF 5,200 were recognized. The complaint before the Cantonal Court of Lucerne, aimed at fully obtaining the child deductions, was dismissed. The affected persons then turned to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_163/2025: Decision on the missed deadline regarding cost advance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ SA filed a complaint with the Federal Court against an arbitral award of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS), which confirmed the sanction of the Swiss Football League (SFL) to classify a sporting defeat as a forfeit. In connection with the complaint, the payment of a cost advance was demanded, the timely payment of which could not be demonstrated.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_260/2025: Proceedings regarding taxes (IFD, ICC) for the tax periods 2011–2014
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.A.________, formerly residing in the Canton of Vaud and majority owner of the company C.________ SA, was prosecuted by the cantonal tax administration of the Canton of Vaud for attempted tax evasion for the tax periods 2011–2014 concerning the direct federal tax (IFD) and the cantonal and municipal taxes (ICC). The points of contention included, among other things, the imposition of fines and the final determination of tax assessment bases by the lower court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_509/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint regarding reinstatement in the appeal period
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court is dealing with a complaint by the wife against a decision of the Civil Chamber of the Geneva Cantonal Court, which approved the husband's reinstatement in the appeal period and determined that his appeal was timely filed.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.