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 dispositive parts. For the other rulings, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all rulings are available on the Lexplorer portal. There, you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest rulings tailored to your legal areas.
5A_677/2025: Ruling on Denial of Justice and Delay of Justice
Summary of Facts
The petitioner files a complaint, believing that the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft acted unlawfully by demanding a cost advance without sufficient justification and allegedly \"delayed\" or \"denied\" justice in his case.
Summary of Considerations
- **E.1**: The complaint regarding delay or denial of justice can generally be raised based on the BGG.
- **E.2**: Claims for damages cannot be addressed within the framework of a complaint for denial of justice or delay of justice. The Federal Court also points out that it has no supervisory authority over cantonal authorities.
- **E.3**: The petitioner has already been informed about the legal basis for the cost advance (§ 20 para. 5 VPO/BL, § 18 GebT/BL). No delay or denial of justice regarding the cost advance could be proven.
- **E.4**: The complaint is partially inadmissible and partially insufficiently justified. The Federal Court decides accordingly in simplified proceedings according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. a and b BGG.
- **E.5**: Due to lack of prospects of success, free legal aid is denied.
- **E.6**: Court costs of CHF 1,000.-- are imposed on the petitioner.
Summary of Dispositive Part
The complaint was dismissed and the court costs were imposed on the petitioner.
5A_804/2024: Modification of Provisional Measures in Divorce Proceedings
Summary of Facts
The petitioner, A.________, requests the modification of a marriage protection order to enforce the assignment of the family apartment to himself for use with his new partner and daughter. The lower court as well as previous decisions rejected similar requests from the petitioner. Significant changes in circumstances that could justify such a modification are not acknowledged by the lower court.
Summary of Considerations
The Federal Court confirms the admissibility of the complaint but only examines violations of constitutional rights according to Art. 98 BGG, as the amount in dispute is not assessable. Decisions on provisional measures are subject to limited review according to Art. 98 BGG. The strict principle of objection was explained, stating that complaints must be detailed and precise regarding the violation of constitutional rights. The higher court denies a significant change in circumstances that would justify a modification of the marriage protection order. The balancing of interests is in favor of the son still living in the disputed apartment and the respondent. The birth of the daughter is also considered, but not as a superior criterion. The petitioner's argumentation concerning the concept of the best interests of the child and the son’s age is rejected by the Federal Court. It considers that the lower court has already examined these aspects. The petitioner’s accusation that the higher court acts arbitrarily or violates constitutional rights in the balancing of interests is dismissed. In particular, the best interests of the child are viewed differently, with the son and the petitioner's new daughter being weighted differently. The petitioner’s financial situation is deemed sufficient for obtaining a substitute housing solution, and his further offer to acquire the co-ownership share is not considered unconstitutional. The complaint is dismissed as unfounded, insofar as it is admitted.
Summary of Dispositive Part
The complaint was dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on the petitioner.
1F_14/2025: Inadmissibility of Revision
Summary of Facts
H.________ requests the revision of the decision of the Federal Court 1C_222/2025 from May 22, 2025. The subject of the original dispute was the granting of a building permit for three residential buildings on a plot in Lausanne and the associated environmental requirements. The decision 1C_222/2025 declared the complaint of the opponents inadmissible as it did not address the arguments of the lower court. The revision is justified by the claim that the original decision is based on an error related to an assumed "double motivation."
Summary of Considerations
- **E.1:** The requirements for a revision according to Art. 121 ff. BGG are strictly regulated, and the applicant must specify exactly which ground for revision is being asserted and how it is to be satisfied to avoid inadmissibility according to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG. - **E.2:** The petitioner’s argument that the original decision is based on a faulty determination regarding the “double motivation” is rejected. The Federal Court clarifies that the lower court presented both a main and a subsidiary justification, with the main justification based on the opponents’ lack of standing to complain. This circumstance does not justify a revision under Art. 121 lit. d BGG. - **E.3:** The revision must not serve to question a legal assessment of the Federal Court again but only to correct clear errors.
Summary of Dispositive Part
The revision is declared inadmissible, and no court costs are incurred.
5A_477/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint and Opening of Bankruptcy
Summary of Facts
The Federal Court deals with a complaint from A.________ GmbH against the dismissal of its request for restoration of the complaint period and against the confirmation of the bankruptcy opening by the Cantonal Court of Zurich. A.________ GmbH argued that it had no access to office premises due to a custody by the bankruptcy office of the key and therefore could not credibly demonstrate its ability to pay.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
8C_694/2024: Decision on the Obligation of the Accident Insurance in Case of Knee Injuries
Summary of Facts
The individual born in 1963, A.________, injured her right knee while hiking on October 4, 2022. Visana Versicherungen AG initially provided insurance benefits but discontinued them as of January 2, 2023. They argued that the damage was no longer accident-related but solely due to age-related degenerative changes. This was later confirmed by a decision on the appeal. The higher court of the Canton of Uri dismissed the complaint filed against it.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_531/2025: Ruling on a Recusal Application by Prosecutors in Connection with Mutual Legal Assistance Hearings
Summary of Facts
A.________, who is accused of qualified money laundering, believes that the behavior of the prosecutors impairs his defense rights. He especially objected to the failure to record an informal exchange between the prosecution and US authorities regarding the hearing of a co-accused.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_394/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Regarding Tax Matters in the Canton of Bern
Summary of Facts
A.A.________ and B.A.________ filed a complaint against the special assessment of their income for the tax year 2024. Both the Tax Appeal Commission of the Canton of Bern and the Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern did not admit the complaint for formal reasons. The complainants appealed the judgment of the Administrative Court to the Federal Court, requesting its annulment and a remand of the matter.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
8C_676/2024: Ruling Concerning Accident Insurance and Disability Assessment
Summary of Facts
A.________ fell from a balcony in 2017 and sustained serious injuries. She was employed as a caregiver and insured against accidents with HDI Global SE. After complete medical treatment and reintegration measures, HDI initially paid daily allowances based on a disability of 10% and later provided a disability pension and integrity compensation based on a disability rate of 10%. However, due to an alleged risk, they reduced these benefits by 50%. After an appeal, HDI adjusted the daily allowances for earlier periods based on total incapacity for work but maintained their decision regarding the disability pension. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Solothurn ultimately granted a disability pension based on a disability rate of 31%, while HDI claimed a rate of 10%.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_1385/2024: Decision on the Applicability of Written/Oral Procedures in Appeal Proceedings
Summary of Facts
A teacher was sentenced by the District Court of Broye and Nord-Vaud to 30 days of fines with a three-year probation period and a fine of 300 CHF for viewing pornographic content on his phone in the presence of a minor female student during a class trip. Additionally, he was indefinitely banned from any professional or organized non-professional activity involving regular contact with minors. The appeal against this lifelong ban was dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Vaud in written proceedings.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
8C_390/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of Facts
The petitioner A.________ filed a complaint against the judgment of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne dated May 30, 2025. The lower court confirmed the decision of the Swiss Accident Insurance Institution (Suva), stating that there is no obligation to provide benefits for health damages beyond August 31, 2024. The lower court justified its decision with the absence of a natural and adequate causal connection between the health damages and an accident event from October 22, 2023.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_578/2024: Decision on the Requirement for Approval According to LDTR for Renovation Works
Summary of Facts
A.A. and B.A., owners of a building in Geneva, carried out extensive renovation works in an apartment without obtaining a building permit. These works led to a significant increase in rent. The Canton of Geneva subsequently required a building permit according to the cantonal LDTR (Law on Demolition, Transformations, and Renovations of Residential Buildings). The point of contention is whether the works are classified as "maintenance" or "renovation" and whether they were subject to approval.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_515/2025: Non-Admission of Complaint Due to Insufficient Justification
Summary of Facts
The petitioner files a complaint against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern, which declared an objection to a penal order due to unexcused absence from the main hearing as withdrawn and denied the bias of the presiding judge of the regional court. Additionally, the petitioner requests the determination of bias as well as the remand of the matter for re-evaluation.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_4/2025: Ruling on the Modification of Provisional Measures in Divorce Proceedings
Summary of Facts
The ruling refers to a complaint from A.A.________ against a decision of the cantonal court concerning provisional measures (maintenance payments) in the divorce proceedings between A.A.________ and B.A.________. The parties have lived separately since 2021, and D.A.________, a common child, became of age in 2023. The wife sought the repeal of the adjustments made by the cantonal court regarding the maintenance arrangement, while the husband sought a modification of his financial obligations.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_631/2025: Decision on the Correction of Personal Status Data
Summary of Facts
The Somali petitioner, who entered Switzerland as a refugee, requested the change of his date of birth in the civil registry from (...) 1976 to (...) 1961. The District Court of Kriens dismissed the lawsuit, as the credibility of the documents and information submitted by the petitioner was not established. The Cantonal Court of Lucerne did not admit the complaint against this decision, as the petitioner did not sufficiently justify his arguments and did not address the considerations of the District Court. The Federal Court was requested to annul the decision and change the date of birth or to remand the matter.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_450/2025: Cost Orders Upon Acquittal and Their Compatibility with Labor Law Regulations
Summary of Facts
The Federal Prosecutor accused A.________ and B.________ of having exploited insider information for the stock purchase of their own company. Both were acquitted in the first instance. The Appeals Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court modified the cost decision of the first instance and imposed procedural costs on the acquitted defendants. They contested this with complaints to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
2D_20/2024: Ruling Concerning Public Tenders
Summary of Facts
A.________ SA filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint against the decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Ticino dated June 26, 2024. The dispute concerned the award of a public construction project by the municipal council of X.________. The complainant particularly objected to the exclusion decision regarding two competing companies based on the tender requirements and demanded a reassessment of the offers, which should lead to a change in the ranking.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_23/2025: Decision Regarding the Rejection of Recusal Applications
Summary of Facts
A.________, who is charged with serious offenses before the District Court of Sierre, with impending limitation of actions, has repeatedly unsuccessfully requested to postpone the proceedings. In addition, he made several requests to replace the presiding judge (President Christina Gaist) due to alleged bias. The lower court, the unique judge of the Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Valais, rejected all applications for recusal.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_347/2025: Decision on Regulating the Personal Contact of a Father with His Child
Summary of Facts
The separated, unmarried parents of a minor child dispute over the arrangement of the father's personal contact with this child. The father requested more extensive visitation rights, while the lower courts planned a gradual expansion of the supervised visitation rights due to the existing loyalty conflict and a comprehensive weighing of interests.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_73/2024: Ruling on Obstruction of an Official Act
Summary of Facts
A.________ was sanctioned for obstructing an official act because he did not wear a protective mask on the Interregio train from Aarau to Liestal on December 16, 2020, despite multiple requests from train staff and later from the police, and delayed the execution of the police order to leave the train. He demonstratively took a water bottle from his backpack and drank from it to obstruct the official act. He showed resistance, had to be carried out of the train in handcuffs, and resisted the police removal on the platform. The lower courts found him guilty and sentenced him to a conditionally enforceable fine and a penalty.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_501/2025: Ruling on Provisional Measures in Divorce Proceedings
Summary of Facts
The petitioner A.________ and the respondent B.________, parents of two minor children, have been in divorce proceedings since 2021. The District Court of Baden withdrew the parties' right to determine the residence of the children and ordered their placement. In a later decision on provisional measures, the children were placed under the sole parental custody of the respondent. The Cantonal Court of Aargau confirmed this decision. The petitioner filed a complaint with the Federal Court requesting the annulment of the judgment of the Cantonal Court, arguing that his and the children's fundamental rights were violated.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_686/2025: Closing of a Criminal Proceeding Due to Defamation and Libel
Summary of Facts
The petitioner filed a criminal complaint against a publication in the newspaper C.________ for defamation (Art. 173 StGB), libel (Art. 174 StGB), and unfair competition (Art. 23 UWG). The Regional Public Prosecutor's Office Bern-Mittelland closed the proceeding. The Cantonal Court of Bern dismissed the complaint filed against this decision. The petitioner sought the annulment of this decision and remand for continuation of the criminal proceedings before the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_528/2025: Complaint Against the Interim Decision of the Solothurn Higher Court Regarding the Remand Request
Summary of Facts
A.________ was sentenced by the District Court of Olten-Gösgen on May 14, 2024, to a term of imprisonment of 4 years and 4 months for property crimes and other offenses, as well as a fine. He appealed and requested the annulment of the judgment, claiming that he had been unfit for trial since the second day of the main hearing. By decision of May 12, 2025, the Solothurn Higher Court rejected the request for remand of the proceedings to the District Court of Olten-Gösgen. A.________ subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_554/2025: Inadmissibility of a Complaint Due to Non-Payment of Cost Advance
Summary of Facts
The petitioner filed a complaint against a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Zurich dated January 13, 2025. Despite being requested, the petitioner did not pay the required cost advance within the set deadlines. Due to this omission, the Federal Court did not admit the complaint.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_627/2025: Ruling on the Non-Admission of Complaint in a Criminal Proceeding
Summary of Facts
The petitioner filed a complaint in criminal matters against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Solothurn dated June 4, 2025. The lower court did not admit his complaint against the non-admission decision of the Solothurn Public Prosecutor's Office dated April 24, 2025.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_822/2024: Decision on Common Practice Regarding the Realization of Mortgage Rights and Associated Administrative Costs
Summary of Facts
In a complex of luxury apartments developed by B.________ SA between 2009 and 2017, 84.99% of the units remained unsold and unusable after their bankruptcy. A.________ SA, the main creditor with a mortgage right, demanded the forced sale of the property. During the insolvency phase, high administrative costs arose, particularly for the homeowners' association (PPE). The amount of the claim for administrative management and the assessment of shared costs are disputed.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_415/2025: Decision Regarding Non-Admission and Closing of a Criminal Case
Summary of Facts
The petitioner filed a complaint against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne, which did not admit his complaint against the closure and non-admission decision of the Lucerne Public Prosecutor's Office. The Federal Court examined the petitioner's submission in simplified proceedings.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_1044/2024: Inadmissibility of a Complaint for the Closing of a Criminal Proceeding Due to Defamation
Summary of Facts
The petitioner A.A.________ filed a criminal complaint against his brothers B.A.________ and C.A.________ for allegedly defamatory statements in the context of a proceeding to establish guardianship for their mutual mother. The Public Prosecutor's Office closed the criminal proceedings, and the complaints against this were dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Schwyz. With a complaint in criminal matters, A.A.________ requested the Federal Court to continue the investigations and to file charges.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_695/2025: Decision on Security-Related Detention
Summary of Facts
The petitioner, A.________, was sentenced by the first-instance court of the District of La Côte to 30 months imprisonment for offenses such as coercion, sexual acts with children, and pornography. Additionally, his continued security-related detention was ordered, and an institutional treatment program was decided. The cantonal appeals instance changed the treatment measure to an outpatient therapy and confirmed his security-related detention. The decision was partially overturned by the Federal Court, with the stipulation to obtain further expertise. The security-related detention was maintained by the cantonal instance until a new decision was made. The petitioner requested his release and filed a complaint against this to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_169/2025: Ruling on the Complaint Against a Conviction for Rape and Sexual Coercion
Summary of Facts
The petitioner A.________ was initially convicted by the District Court of St. Gallen for rape and sexual coercion to a prison sentence of 4 years and 9 months. The Cantonal Court of St. Gallen dismissed his appeal. Against this decision, the petitioner filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court, requesting acquittal or remand to the lower court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_651/2024: Participation in Mutual Legal Assistance Hearings Abroad
Summary of Facts
A.________ is suspected of transferring illicit funds from corruption offenses in Venezuela. The Public Prosecutor's Office III of the Canton of Zurich informed him about hearings of B.________ and C.________ in the USA, provided him with protocols, and allowed written supplementary questions. A.________ then requested the mutual legal assistance participation of his legal representative in further hearings in the USA and demanded a contestable decision when this was declined. The Public Prosecutor's Office did not address this request, prompting A.________ to file complaints.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9F_12/2025: Proceedings Regarding Revision and Restoration of Deadlines
Summary of Facts
The petitioner A.________ requested a revision of the Federal Court decision 9C_160/2025 dated May 12, 2025. He claimed that due to a mental illness, he was unable to process the Federal Court's letter of March 14, 2025, in a timely manner. He also requested the restoration of the deadline. The Federal Court examined both the revision according to Art. 121 ff. BGG and the restoration of the deadline according to Art. 50 BGG.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_631/2025: Decision on the Continuation of Substitute Measures for Pre-Trial Detention
Summary of Facts
A.________, who is charged with willful arson (Art. 221 para. 1 StGB), has been subject to substitute measures for pre-trial detention, including electronic monitoring, since his arrest. A forensic report indicated a low risk of recidivism; however, the cantonal instance maintained the restrictions due to the nature of the charges.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_834/2024: Withdrawal of a Complaint Procedure Regarding Divorce and Maintenance Payments
Summary of Facts
A.A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court on December 5, 2024, against the decision of the Civil Chamber of the Cour de justice of the Canton of Geneva dated October 31, 2024, regarding divorce and maintenance payments. In the context of the complaint, he also requested the granting of free legal aid and the ordering of a suspensive effect. On August 20, 2025, A.A.________ withdrew his complaint.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_681/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against Comprehensive Guardianship
Summary of Facts
A.________ addresses a complaint against the decision of the Chambre de surveillance of the Cour de justice of the Canton of Geneva, which declared her complaint regarding a comprehensive guardianship ordered by the Tribunal de protection de l'adulte et de l'enfant of the Canton of Geneva in the context of superprovisional measures as inadmissible.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_248/2025: Decision on Custody and Foster Placement in Child Protection Proceedings
Summary of Facts
The parents, A.________ and B.B.________, exercise parental care jointly. Due to the conflict-laden relationship, many judicial proceedings arose. The child was temporarily placed in foster care, then custody was granted to the mother. The father again requests foster placement or the transfer of custody to him, as well as further evidence requests and recusal applications against the members of the KESB.
Full summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.