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 areas of law.
5A_652/2025: Decision on the Topic of Garnishment
Summary of the Facts
A.________ contested a garnishment by the Mendrisio Debt Collection Office, which garnished CHF 1,890.-- of his income from self-employment each month, based on an estimated net profit of CHF 4,000.--. The lower court had declared A.________'s request to reduce the estimated income to CHF 2,400.-- as inadmissible, since he did not submit any new evidence and merely repeated previous, legally adjudicated objections.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The appeal is classified as a complaint in civil matters. According to the Federal Court Act (Art. 42 para. 2 and Art. 106 para. 2 BGG), a precise justification is required, especially in cases of violations of fundamental rights and cantonal or inter-cantonal law. - **E.3.1:** The appellant should have specifically addressed the arguments of the lower court's inadmissibility decision. His statements do not meet the justification requirements of the aforementioned articles of the BGG. - **E.3.2:** The generic statements of the appellant concerning his income of CHF 2,400.-- and the reference to problems with his health and professional situation are not sufficient to legally challenge the lower court's inadmissibility decision. - **E.4:** The Federal Court decides in a simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG on the obvious inadmissibility of the complaint.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint is declared inadmissible and no court costs are incurred.
6B_230/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Due to Multiple Attempted Extortion
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ is accused of having commissioned inmates and persons outside the correctional facility to collect money from the private plaintiffs C.C.________ and his wife D.C.________, under the threat of violence against their family. The offered payments were not made.
Summary of the Considerations
1.1–1.2 (E.1): The complaint must be precisely justified based on the considerations of the lower court. Qualified complaint requirements exist for asserting violations of fundamental rights, especially arbitrariness in the determination of facts. 2.1–2.1.2 (E.2.1): The lower court examined the procedural rights and noted that there is no necessary defense in independent investigative proceedings prior to the opening of the criminal investigation. 2.2–2.3.3 (E.2.3): The police interrogations of the private plaintiffs C.C.________ and D.C.________ were conducted lawfully before the formal opening of the investigation. The lower court was allowed to use these statements. The further objections of the appellant, especially regarding the admissibility of later interrogations, are unfounded. 2.4 (E.2.4): The legal qualification and sentencing are not challenged by the appellant. There are no further objections.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint was dismissed and the court costs imposed on the appellant.
6B_265/2025: Federal Court Ruling on the Legal Assessment of Traffic Obstruction and Freedom of Expression
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a student, participated in an unauthorized demonstration in Lausanne on September 20, 2019, during which she, along with other participants, blocked traffic on the Pont Bessières. This led to significant restrictions in the public transport network. She was initially convicted by the police court and later by the Vaud cantonal court for various offenses, including obstruction of public services. She appealed the ruling of the cantonal court to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1**: The Federal Court examines the application of Art. 239 of the Penal Code (Obstruction of Public Services), which applies to the traffic obstructions caused by the demonstration. It recognizes that the disturbance had significant intensity, as several routes were affected and delays as well as diversions occurred for several hours. The actions of the appellant exceed the tolerable level of restrictions imposed by the exercise of the right to assemble.
**E.2**: The rights of the appellant to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly (Art. 16 BV, Art. 22 BV, Art. 10 ECHR, Art. 11 ECHR) were analyzed in relation to her participation in the demonstration. The court acknowledges that state interventions are justified and proportionate, particularly due to the traffic disturbances caused and the lack of authorization for the event.
**E.3**: The appellant's arguments that her guilt is minor or motivated by honorable intentions (Art. 52 and Art. 48 Penal Code) were dismissed. The Federal Court found that her actions had significant consequences, and her motivation – despite possibly idealistic intentions – does not justify extraordinary leniency in sentencing.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint was dismissed and the request for free legal aid was denied. The appellant bears the court costs.
6B_228/2025: Ruling on Conviction for Multiple Attempted Extortion and Violence Against Authorities and Officials
Summary of the Facts
The Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich convicted A.________ of multiple attempted extortion, violence and threats against authorities and officials, as well as assault, to a prison sentence of 12 months and a fine of CHF 800.--. It also ordered two compensation payments of CHF 4,000.-- and CHF 2,500.-- to private plaintiffs, while other claims were referred to civil court. A.________ appealed and requested acquittal as well as the annulment of the prison sentence and other orders.
You can find the complete summary of the ruling in the Portal.
4A_203/2025: Ruling Regarding Party Compensation in the Debt Enforcement Procedure
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG operated the C.________ Foundation (later B.________) on the basis of a claim of CHF 161,550 and CHF 1,529.35, each plus interest, against which an objection was raised. The District Court of Zurich granted provisional enforcement for a partial amount and rejected the requests for party compensation. The plaintiff filed a claim for annulment in the Commercial Court of the Canton of Aargau and requested, among other things, party compensation. The Commercial Court fully upheld the claim and awarded the plaintiff party compensation for the enforcement procedure before the District Court. An appeal was filed against this cost decision.
You can find the complete summary of the ruling in the Portal.
6B_966/2024: Ruling on Falsity in Documents and Legal Violations in Criminal Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was found guilty before the lower court of falsity in documents and multiple procedural fraud actions. The case involved, among other things, the false indication of the economically entitled person when opening a postal account contract in 2018, where A.________ falsely claimed to be entitled, while in fact B.________ was the economically entitled person. He was also accused of having assisted B.________ in presenting false documents in court to conceal his financial situation in connection with alimony payments. The sentence consisted of a fine of 90 daily rates, suspended with a probation period of two years. In the appeal, the CARP confirmed the conviction for falsity in documents but overturned the conviction for multiple procedural fraud due to an invalid criminal complaint. The sentence was accordingly reduced to 30 daily rates. A.________ received partial compensation for the defense costs. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court and requested to be acquitted of the charge of falsity in documents.
You can find the complete summary of the ruling in the Portal.
5A_180/2025: Decision on Complaints Related to the Suspension of Deadlines for a Lawsuit According to Art. 107 para. 5 SchKG and the Seizability of Disputed Assets
Summary of the Facts
This case involves three deadlines for lawsuits according to Art. 107 para. 5 SchKG, which were imposed on the company A.________ & B.________ Sàrl, in liquidation, to clarify its claim to disputed assets that were seized in ongoing enforcement proceedings by the Debt Collection Office of the Canton of Geneva. The company had previously requested the suspension of the ownership lawsuit according to Art. 106 ff. SchKG until the clarification of the ownership issue in parallel ongoing criminal proceedings.
You can find the complete summary of the ruling in the Portal.