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 decisions. 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.
8C_173/2025: Decision Regarding Benefits of Accident Insurance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ suffered a fall on December 14, 2020, which resulted in injuries. The point of contention was the claim for benefits from the accident insurance beyond June 21, 2021. The lower court ruled in favor of the insured and set the benefit entitlement until December 31, 2021, which was challenged by Solida Assurances SA.
Summary of the Considerations
E.1: The appeal is formally admissible.
E.2: The subject matter concerns the claim for benefits from accident insurance. The Federal Court is free in assessing the findings of fact, as both cash benefits and benefits in kind are involved.
E.3: The lower court considered the legal bases for accident insurance as well as the principles of natural and adequate causation and the evaluation of medical reports. The Federal Court adheres to these principles.
E.4: The lower court assumed an improvement in A.________'s shoulder mobility after the accident until the end of 2021 and based the extended benefit entitlement on this. Solida contested this assessment, referring to an early stabilization and the influence of a pre-existing condition.
E.5: The Federal Court found that the submitted medical reports were contradictory and that the lower court should have conducted further investigations. An expert report to clarify the remaining questions is ordered.
Summary of the Decision
The appeal was partially upheld, the judgment was overturned, and the matter was referred back for further investigation.
9D_10/2025: Non-acceptance of an Appeal in Tax Matters
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________, represented by B.________, appealed to the Federal Court against the judgments of the Special Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau from April 4, 2025. The lower court had partially upheld various appeals in tax matters for the tax periods 2011-2014 and referred the matter back to the city council of Aarburg for reassessment. Furthermore, requests for recusal and other legal remedies were not accepted, and free legal representation was denied.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1** The Federal Court pointed out that the deadline for submitting an appeal according to Art. 100 BGG is not extendable. It also noted the requirements of the justification obligation according to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG, which were not met by the submission.
**E.2.1** The appeal deadline expired on May 27, 2025. The first submission meeting the requirements was only made afterward, which is why the appeal is not accepted (Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG).
**E.2.2** The question of whether the submission should have been qualified as an appeal in public law matters or as a subsidiary constitutional complaint will not be further examined.
**E.3** According to the loser principle, the court costs of CHF 1,000.- are imposed on the appellant (Art. 65 and 66 para. 1 BGG).
Summary of the Decision
The appeal is not accepted, and the court costs of CHF 1,000.- are imposed on the appellant.
9D_9/2025: Non-consideration of an Appeal Due to Lack of Justification
Summary of the Facts
A.________ requested a waiver of costs in connection with a ruling from the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau. The Administrative Court did not consider his recusal request and denied his requests for free legal aid, legal representation, and extension of deadlines. In the proceedings before the Federal Court, A.________ submitted several late filings. The appeal was insufficiently justified and did not meet the formal requirements.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau had denied the extension of deadlines and the free legal aid and set a deadline for the payment of the cost advance of CHF 400. The Federal Court later found that the appeal did not meet the formal requirements and informed the appellant of the consequences of not submitting a compliant filing. - **E.2:** The appellant's submissions contained no relevant and sufficient justification according to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG. The statutory appeal deadline expired on May 26, 2025, without a timely, valid submission. The Federal Court therefore decided not to consider the appeal. - **E.3:** According to the loser principle, the procedural costs are imposed on the appellant.
Summary of the Decision
It was decided not to consider the appeal and to impose the court costs on the appellant.
9C_386/2025: Decision on the Jurisdiction of Compensation Funds
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, received a maximum widow's pension from the compensation fund of Basel-Landschaft effective March 2023, although she is registered as self-employed with the compensation fund of Basel-Stadt and pays contributions there. She contests that the jurisdiction should lie with the compensation fund of Basel-Stadt. The Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft did not consider the appeal due to a lack of legitimate interest.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_460/2024: Decision Regarding Exemption from Insurance Obligation According to Art. 2 para. 8 OAMal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a Swiss and German national, was insured until the end of 2011 partially through an international insurance policy of her parents and partially through B.________ AG. This exemption from the insurance obligation ended when she turned 30 years old. However, she failed to register with a health insurance according to Swiss law in a timely manner and only applied for exemption from the insurance obligation years later. This application was denied by the responsible cantonal office (SAM) as she did not meet the legal conditions for an exemption. Her appeal before the cantonal instance was also unsuccessful.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.