Latest Rulings of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most recent rulings of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three rulings, we present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositions. For the other rulings, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all rulings are available on the portal of Lexplorer. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest rulings tailored to your areas of law.
8C_145/2025: Decision on Disability Insurance (Pension)
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a woman born in 1985 who already receives a half pension from disability insurance, submitted a new request for a full disability pension after moving to the Canton of Jura in 2022, citing a deterioration in her health condition. However, a psychiatric report confirmed a continued 50% reduced work capacity in an adapted occupation. The disability insurance rejected the request, which was also confirmed by the cantonal lower court.
Summary of Considerations
**E.1**: The Federal Court notes that the appeal was submitted in a timely manner and is admissible in substantive terms (Art. 90, 100 and 42 BGG).
**E.2**: The legal framework regarding the requirements for disability assessments (Art. 7 and 8 ATSG, Art. 28a IVG) as well as evidential assessment was comprehensively explained by the lower court. In particular, the prerequisites for new requests for benefits (Art. 87 para. 2 and 3 IVV) and the evidential value of medical reports were elucidated.
**E.4**: The lower court relied on the psychiatric report of Dr. F., which provided detailed diagnoses and analyses of work capacity based on legal indicators. The court found no arbitrary or erroneous assessments and confirmed the evaluation of 50% work capacity in an adapted occupation.
**E.5**: The claim of a violation of the right to a public hearing according to Art. 6 ECHR by the lower court is rejected, as the appellant did not clearly request such a hearing but merely focused on her own and an external statement as evidence.
**E.6**: The diverging reports from other doctors and the report document from a professional rehabilitation center do not justify deviations from the assessment, as they did not provide clear professional evidence against the psychiatric report of Dr. F. The evidential evaluation of the lower court was therefore not arbitrary.
Summary of Disposition
The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant received partial free legal aid; the costs were provisionally borne by the court treasury.
7B_1376/2024: Ruling on Commercial Fraud and Other Offenses
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.________ was initially convicted by the Basel-Landschaft Criminal Court for multiple counts of fraud, multiple counts of fraudulent misuse of a data processing system, and theft, receiving a conditional prison sentence of eight months. She was acquitted on other charges. The Basel-Landschaft Cantonal Court intensified the ruling and sentenced the appellant for commercial fraud, other fraud offenses, misuse of a data processing system, and theft to a prison sentence of 39 months and a conditionally enforceable fine. Compensation claims were also settled. The appellant then appealed to the Federal Court, requesting among other things a lighter sentence and acquittal on certain points.
Summary of Considerations
- **E.1:** The conditions for the admissibility of the appeal are met, and it will be considered.
- **E.2:** Commercial fraud is present, as the appellant systematically obtained a significant cash flow from victims through deception, exploiting their trust through emotional manipulation and false promises. The appellant's allegations regarding the findings of the lower court are unfounded.
- **E.3:** In the case of the fraudulent misuse of the postcard from C.________, the Federal Court sees no reason to question the conclusions of the lower court, as the lack of consent from C.________ can be understandably derived from his report.
- **E.4:** The lower court's sentencing appropriately considers the overall culpability and does not exceed discretion. The reduction of the sentence due to the violation of the acceleration obligation is adequately taken into account by the lower court. The appellant does not receive any further mitigation.
- **E.5:** The allocation of costs by the lower court is correct according to the relevant provisions; a reduction or exemption is not indicated.
Summary of Disposition
The appeal was dismissed, the request for free legal aid was rejected, and the court costs were imposed on the appellant.
1C_411/2023: Appeal regarding the Plan for Public Use
Summary of Facts
The municipality of Corseaux planned the reorganization and development of its plot No. 489, including the construction of a new retirement and nursing home ("EMS Q1.________"), a daycare center, and protected living space. The plot is located at the foot of a vineyard and was previously partially regulated by older plans. Numerous private individuals and organizations raised objections against the planned new construction, which partially affects the existing vineyard areas. However, the plan was approved by the municipal council, the competent department of the Canton of Vaud, and the population in a referendum. Several appellants claim before the Federal Court that the plan violates various principles of spatial planning law.
Summary of Considerations
**E.1**: The appeal is generally admissible as it concerns a decision of the last cantonal instance and meets all the conditions of the Federal Court Act (Art. 82 ff. BGG).
**E.2**: The old plans are obsolete, are replaced by the new plan, and do not require a separate pre-trial examination. The cantonal authority correctly addressed this point.
**E.3**: There is no obligation to link the new plan with the ongoing revision of the overall planning of the municipality. Spatial planning allows for specific partial plans independently of the overall revision if they can be harmonized with the principles. This requirement is met here.
**E.4**: The balancing of interests was carried out. The new planning takes public interest and local conditions into account. There are no special landscape protection or legally binding reasons against the project, and the impacts on the vineyard landscape are limited.
**E.5**: The plan does not violate any specific federal or cantonal protection regulations. The existing building heights and placement of the project are suitable for the location.
Summary of Disposition
The appeal is dismissed, and the costs are imposed on the losing appellants, without party compensation.
5A_610/2025: Decision on the Suspensive Effect of Provisional Measures regarding the Parents' Right of Residence
Summary of Facts
A.________ (mother) and B.________ (father) have been in divorce proceedings since 2021. Their children C.________ and D.________ live with the mother, who has custody. Due to issues regarding the schooling and cooperation of the mother with involved professionals, the Civil Court of Basel-Stadt provisionally ordered the withdrawal of the parents' right of residence. The right of residence was initially transferred to the KESB at the mother's residence, but later to the KESB Basel-Stadt. The mother repeatedly requested the granting of suspensive effect to these decisions, which was rejected by the Basel-Stadt Appeals Court. The mother then appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_297/2025: Non-acceptance of an Appeal Related to an Employment Contract
Summary of Facts
The appellant requested the nullification of a ruling of the same court from the Zurich Cantonal Court. The Cantonal Court forwarded the submission to the Federal Court, which treated it as an appeal. The appellant did not comply with the request to pay a court fee, even within the set deadline.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_646/2023: Decision on the Building Permit for a Mobile Communications Facility
Summary of Facts
Swisscom applied for the establishment of a mobile communications facility on a building in Grenchen. After objections from residents A.A. and B.A., the Building, Planning and Environmental Commission of the city of Grenchen approved the facility with conditions. The Government Council and the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn rejected the complaints from the residents. The residents then appealed to the Federal Court, requesting among other things the refusal of the building permit and the determination of the unconstitutionality and illegality of certain provisions of the Ordinance on the Protection against Non-Ionizing Radiation (NISV).
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_331/2025: Decision Regarding the Withdrawal of the Legal Remedy Due to Lack of Response to a Deadline Reminder
Summary of Facts
A.________ filed an appeal with the Administrative and Public Law Court of the Cantonal Tribunal of Vaud (CDAP) against a decision of the cantonal Service of Vehicles and Navigation, which had revoked his vehicle registration and license plates. The CDAP requested him, under the threat of the withdrawal of the legal remedy, to present the contested decision by May 15, 2025. As he did not comply with this request and did not present the document, his case was considered withdrawn by the CDAP and struck from the register. A.________ filed an appeal against this decision with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_287/2024: Ruling on the Contract for Transport Services
Summary of Facts
A.________ AG, a transport company, was commissioned in June 2018 by B.________ SA, a pharmaceutical trading company, to transport products to Jordan and Turkey. Due to an error by the transport company, the goods were switched, leading to customs issues in Jordan and the destruction of medications with a short shelf life. B.________ SA replaced the destroyed goods and demanded compensation from A.________ AG, which was denied.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_601/2025: Decision Regarding Provisional Measures in Child Protection
Summary of Facts
The parents of the minors B.________ and D.________ have been separated since 2017. In this case, it concerns the provisional withdrawal of the parents' right of residence over their son B.________ (born 2012) as ordered by the lower court, as well as his placement in a 365-day boarding school. The reason for the measure is the child's prolonged school absenteeism and his difficult social situation. The child's mother (appellant) requests the Federal Court to overturn the decision and conclude the proceedings without further measures.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_384/2025: Decision on the Inadmissibility of an Appeal Related to Cantonal and Municipal Taxes of the Canton of Valais
Summary of Facts
A.________ filed an appeal on July 9, 2025, against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Valais, Department of Tax Law, from June 11, 2025. The subject of the dispute concerns a fine of 100 CHF in connection with the cantonal and municipal taxes of the Canton of Valais, as A.________ failed to submit the tax return for the 2022 tax period in a timely manner.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_55/2025: Ruling on Complaints of Denial of Rights and Delay of Rights Against the Municipality of Zizers
Summary of Facts
A.________ and B.________, appellants, are addressing the municipality of Zizers in two separate proceedings. The subjects of dispute are, on the one hand, the removal of parcel 1313 from a landscape protection zone and, on the other hand, compensation for the maintenance of an agricultural path. Both proceedings were dismissed by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden due to lack of admissibility. The appellants complain of delays and denials of rights as well as grounds for recusal.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_547/2024: Decision on the Designation of a Cantonal Reserved Zone in the Canton of Vaud
Summary of Facts
The appellant, owner of three undeveloped plots in Leysin (zone of very low building density, "Zone of Chalets A"), opposed the designation of a cantonal reserved zone on these properties by the Canton of Vaud. The cantonal planning authorities justified this with the significant excess of building zones in the municipality of Leysin and a necessary reduction according to the provisions of the Spatial Planning Act (LAT). The cantonal court and the Federal Court rejected the appeal against this measure.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_724/2024: Access to an Electronic Calendar of a Public Prosecutor
Summary of Facts
A.________ requested access to the calendar entries of a former Geneva public prosecutor (B.________) for three months (October 2016, March 2017, and February 2018) from his electronic agenda (Outlook) to obtain information regarding a criminal investigation concerning him. The Commission for Judicial Management denied access on the grounds that the agenda served personal use and was not a publicly accessible document under cantonal law. The cantonal court confirmed this rejection, whereupon A.________ appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_385/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of an Appeal in Tax Law
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal on July 9, 2025, against a ruling of the Cantonal Court of Valais from June 11, 2025. The subject of the dispute concerns the non-admission decisions regarding the tax assessments (cantonal and federal taxes) for the tax year 2022. The appeal was examined by the Federal Court in a simplified procedure.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_673/2024: Ruling Regarding a Building Application and the Protection of Tree Stock
Summary of Facts
C.________ SA applied for a building permit for two residential buildings in Lausanne on a recently acquired plot that includes an orchard. The neighboring residents, A.A.________ and B.A.________, opposed due to a walnut tree located on their property that would be endangered by the construction work. The responsible authorities granted all necessary permits, imposing protective measures for the tree as conditions.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_467/2025: Decision on the Non-Acceptance Decision Regarding Change of Official Defense
Summary of Facts
The appellant, A.________, requested a change of his official defense. The President of the Solothurn-Lebern District Court rejected the request without a legal remedy advisory. The appellant then requested the addition of the decision with a legal remedy advisory. The Appeals Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Solothurn mistakenly classified his letter as an appeal and did not consider it.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_641/2024: Decision Regarding the Termination of Public Law Employment Relationships
Summary of Facts
A.________ had been employed with the cantonal civil protection and military service since February 1, 2003. From July 1, 2013, the employment relationships were taken over by the employer C.________, where A.________ worked as a trainer. Due to unmet evaluation goals and identified service deficiencies, A.________ was reprimanded multiple times. After a prolonged illness-related work incapacity, C.________ terminated the employment relationship on June 19, 2024, effective at the end of September 2024. An allegation of bullying by A.________ was deemed unfounded.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
8C_237/2024: Proceedings Regarding Reimbursement from Disability Insurance
Summary of Facts
The IV Office of Solothurn had filed an appeal against a ruling of the Insurance Court of the Canton of Solothurn from March 26, 2024, concerning a reimbursement in the area of disability insurance. In a letter dated July 16, 2025, the IV Office withdrew its appeal.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_339/2025: Decision Regarding Official Defense
Summary of Facts
A.________ requested the appointment of an official defender in the context of a criminal investigation due to suspected violations of the Narcotics Act, which was denied by the Public Prosecutor's Office. The Cantonal Court of Aargau dismissed the appeal filed against this decision. A.________ then turned to the Federal Court, requesting the appointment of an official defense as well as free legal aid.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_505/2024: Decision on a Building Permit for a Mobile Communications Facility
Summary of Facts
Swisscom (Schweiz) AG applied for the establishment of a new mobile communications facility in Küsnacht on an existing antenna mast. The building permit was granted but challenged by several private appellants. The planned facility is intended to complement existing installations in the area and cover new frequency ranges. Following a rejection decision from the Building Appeal Court, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich confirmed the permit. The appellants then filed an appeal to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.