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 provide detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and rulings. 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 legal fields.
7B_882/2025: Decision on a complaint regarding the extension of pre-trial detention
Summary of the facts
A.________, a Togolese citizen, is accused of having committed a series of offenses, including receiving stolen goods, breach of trust, fraud, unauthorized use of a computer, identity theft, and forgery of documents. He is alleged to have used stolen identity documents, among other things, to rent vehicles that were not returned, as well as committing various other types of fraud ('Falsobanco'). After his arrest on April 14, 2025, he was taken into pre-trial detention, the extension of which until October 14, 2025, was confirmed by the cantonal authorities. The complaint is directed against the refusal of his release or the ordering of alternative measures.
Summary of considerations
- E.1: The complaint is permissible under Art. 78 para. 1 BGG, as a decision on pre-trial detention is the subject of the proceedings. The complainant has a legitimate interest in the proceedings due to a threatened irreparable disadvantage. - E.2: - E.2.1: The complainant disputes the sufficient suspicion and the risk of collusion (risk of conspiracy). - E.2.2: According to the Federal Court, pre-trial detention is only permissible if it is based on a legal basis such as Art. 221 StPO, there is a public interest, and the principle of proportionality is maintained. The lower court affirms serious suspicion and risk of collusion. - E.2.3: The lower court bases its decision on various incriminating indications, including statements from co-defendants as well as evidence such as mobile phones and bank cards, which indicate the involvement of the complainant. The Federal Court considers this evidence sufficient but rejects the appellate criticism of the complainant. - E.2.4: The lower court sees a concrete risk of collusion, as several investigations and interviews are still pending, which could be hindered by the freedom of the complainant. - E.2.5: The proposed alternative measures of the complainant (e.g., obligation to cooperate and behave) are regarded as insufficient to eliminate the risk of manipulations. The continued detention is deemed proportionate. - E.2.6: The Federal Court confirms the extension of pre-trial detention.
Summary of the ruling
The complaint is dismissed, and the complainant is granted free legal assistance.
4F_31/2025: Revision of a Federal Court ruling regarding free legal assistance
Summary of the facts
A petitioner requested a revision of a Federal Court ruling (4D_113/2025 of July 29, 2025), in which the Federal Court had not considered his complaint against a decision of the Thurgau Cantonal Court. The original request for free legal assistance was deemed hopeless and rejected. The petitioner did not sufficiently justify his request for revision and submitted further applications for free legal assistance and suspensive effect.
Summary of considerations
- **E.1:** The Federal Court notes that rulings of the Federal Court become final and can only be reviewed according to the exhaustively listed grounds for revision in Arts. 121–123 BGG. The submission of the petitioner is treated as a request for revision. - **E.2:** The request for revision does not meet the requirements for content and justification according to Art. 42 para. 1-2 BGG. It remains unclear what unconsidered facts or legal violations are to be claimed, which is why the request is deemed insufficient. - **E.3:** The request for free legal assistance is denied, as the revision request appears hopeless from the outset. - **E.4:** The court costs are borne by the petitioner, and no party compensation is granted.
Summary of the ruling
The request for revision is denied, and the court costs are imposed on the petitioner.
6B_494/2025: Ruling on expulsion and its registration in the Schengen Information System (SIS)
Summary of the facts
A.________, a Libyan citizen, was convicted of multiple serious offenses, including attempted serious bodily injury and robbery. The Zurich Cantonal Court sentenced him to a prison term of 63 months, a fine, and a penalty. Additionally, an expulsion for 8 years was ordered, along with its registration in the Schengen Information System. A.________ lodged a complaint against the expulsion. The Federal Court dismissed his complaint and confirmed the lower court's decision.
Summary of considerations
The respondent argued that the public interest in the expulsion clearly outweighs the considerations against it, and that a prohibition of return due to international obligations or unreasonable circumstances does not apply. The Federal Court examined the prerequisites for expulsion according to Art. 66a para. 1 StGB. The serious offenses committed by the complainant met the legal criteria for obligatory expulsion. An exception according to Art. 66a para. 2 StGB was denied, as no severe personal hardship was present and the public interests in expulsion prevailed. The balancing of interests by the lower court, which considered both the personal and professional circumstances of the complainant as well as his poor integration, was confirmed by the Federal Court. A.________ poses a danger to public safety due to his lack of chances for rehabilitation and his high risk of reoffending violent crimes. No definitive execution obstacle according to Art. 66d StGB was established. The general situation in Libya does not justify an exception, especially as binding migration decisions do not indicate any danger or refugee status of the complainant. The duration of 8 years for the expulsion was deemed appropriate, as the high risk of further offenses justifies the interest in removal. The court did not consider the registration of the expulsion in the SIS due to insufficient justification of the complaint.
Summary of the ruling
The complaint is dismissed, the request for free legal assistance is granted, and no court costs are imposed.
5A_228/2025: Ruling on the validation of a power of attorney
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against the refusal to validate a power of attorney by the KESB Innerschwyz. The KESB refused the validation and instead appointed a representative assistant for the affected party C.________. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz confirmed this decision, against which the complainant filed a civil complaint with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_791/2025: Inadmissibility of early execution of sentence due to risks of collusion
Summary of the facts
A.________ was convicted by the Criminal Court of the Canton of Geneva, among other things, for incitement to attempted extortion and coercion, and sentenced to a prison term of six years, minus the pre-trial detention already served. Additionally, his security custody was ordered. On the basis of health problems, the length of the appeal process, and the pre-trial detention already served, A.________ submitted a request for early execution of the sentence in June 2025, along with a transfer to another correctional facility. The Criminal Court rejected this request, after which A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9D_13/2025: Decision on free legal assistance in tax amnesty proceedings
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ applied for free legal assistance in the tax amnesty proceedings of the Tax Appeal Commission of the Canton of Bern. After its rejection due to the hopelessness of the proceedings, she filed complaints with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern, which were also dismissed. Subsequently, A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_980/2025: Extension of pre-trial detention – Detention order overturned
Summary of the facts
A.________ is suspected of having illegally generated vouchers through manipulated sports betting machines, causing damages of over CHF 250,000. The pre-trial detention has been repeatedly extended, last until November 28, 2025. The complaint against the extension of detention was dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Bern. A.________ then requested the Federal Court to revoke the detention and to order his immediate release.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_423/2025: Decision on household contribution according to RTVG
Summary of the facts
The Federal Court assesses a complaint from A.________ against an interim decision of the Federal Administrative Court, which dismissed his request for free legal assistance and set a new deadline for the payment of the cost advance. The complaint lacks sufficient justification, and further statements by the complainant are incomprehensible and obviously inadmissible.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4F_30/2025: Inadmissibility of correction and revision requests
Summary of the facts
The petitioner submitted a request for correction and, eventually, a revision request against an earlier ruling of the Federal Court (4D_98/2025). The request for correction and supplement as well as the request for revision concern alleged legal errors and the review of the ruling's disposition.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_337/2025: Ruling regarding qualified gross traffic rule violations and driving without authorization
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ is accused of having participated in an unauthorized car race on March 26, 2020, and of having driven a truck between January 2020 and March 2021 without holding the required driver's license. The Cantonal Court of Aargau convicted him in the second instance to a conditional prison sentence and a conditional fine. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
8C_62/2025: Claim for benefits after accident and examination of causality of natural and adequate type
Summary of the facts
The insured A.________ suffered a leg injury while on vacation in July 2022. The Caisse nationale suisse d'assurance en cas d'accidents (CNA) initially recognized the claim for insurance benefits but suspended it as of October 29, 2022, citing the "statu quo sine vel ante." A.________ opposed this and submitted medical reports showing ongoing impairment. After the CNA rejected the opposition, she filed a complaint, which was dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Valais.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_418/2025: Ruling on expulsion and its registration in the SIS
Summary of the facts
A.________ was convicted in the first instance for an attack and traveling without a valid ticket. In addition to a conditional prison sentence of six months and a fine of CHF 100, an expulsion for five years was ordered. The Cantonal Court of Schwyz confirmed this decision. A.________ requested the Federal Court to refrain from the expulsion and to limit it to Switzerland, as well as to amend the conviction.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_1012/2024: Ruling of the Federal Court on sexual offenses and evidence
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ was convicted by the correctional tribunal on February 23, 2024, for rape and received a prison sentence of 30 months. The victim B.________ accused A.________ of repeated sexual assaults that occurred during their relationship. On September 2, 2024, the Court of Appeal confirmed the charges and increased the compensation for B.________ to 20,000 francs. A.________ subsequently filed an appeal with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_173/2024: Ruling regarding traffic rule violations and negligent bodily injury
Summary of the facts
A.________ is accused of gross traffic rule violations, negligent bodily injury, and wrongful behavior at an accident. In May 2020, he allegedly exceeded the permissible maximum speed on the highway by 71 km/h. In August 2020, he performed an abrupt braking maneuver at a roundabout, causing the injured party B.________ to have an accident and be injured. Other traffic rule violations, such as crossing a safety line, are also attributed to him. The District Court of Uster acquitted A.________ regarding the speeding allegation but convicted him in relation to the roundabout incident with a conditional fine and penalties. The Cantonal Court of Zurich overturned the acquittal on the first point, convicted A.________ again on the remaining points, and increased the sentence to a conditional prison sentence, fine, and a penalty. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court and demanded a complete annulment of the judgment of the Cantonal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_565/2024: Claim related to an international Registration Agreement
Summary of the facts
The B.________ AG (plaintiff, respondent) and A.________ (defendant, complainant) entered into a Registration Agreement to obtain market approvals in Morocco. According to this contract, the defendant was to transfer the official permits and rights issued to it to the plaintiff upon request. After the permits expired and the contract was terminated, the defendant was requested by the plaintiff to issue relevant documents and declarations to enable re-approval to another holder. The defendant refused this, prompting the plaintiff to file a lawsuit.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
2C_12/2025: Decision regarding non-renewal of residence permit and expulsion
Summary of the facts
The North Macedonian citizen A.A.________ has been legally residing in Switzerland since 2007. After separating from her husband in 2017, her residence permit was extended with the condition of providing proof of language proficiency at level A2. Despite multiple requests, she was unable to provide sufficient proof by the last permit extension in 2022, valid until May 31, 2023. The cantonal migration office denied the further extension of her residence permit as well as the granting of a settlement permit and ordered her expulsion. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau confirmed this decision, mainly due to a lack of efforts towards language and social integration. The Federal Court dismisses the complainant's appeal.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_551/2024: Decision on a debt recognition in contracts for employee leasing
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ had signed a debt recognition based on a contract with the respondent B.________ Sagl regarding employee leasing. However, questions arose regarding the validity of the contract, as essential requirements of the formal provisions according to Art. 22 of the Federal Law on Employment Mediation and Personnel Leasing (LC) were not met. Despite the formal deficiencies, the contract was fully executed.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_590/2025: Ruling regarding denial of rights and delay of justice
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed two complaints against decisions of the Cantonal Court of Zurich, in which it either did not consider her complaints or dismissed them. The complaints concern allegations of denial of rights and delay of justice. The Federal Court assesses the two complaints in a consolidated procedure, as they relate to the same or interconnected legal questions.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4D_193/2025: Dispute over tenant eviction: Complaint against the non-admission decision of the Thurgau Cantonal Court
Summary of the facts
The complainant and her husband were evicted from a rental property according to the decision of the District Court of Weinfelden. The Cantonal Court of Thurgau did not consider the complaint against this decision, as the complainant had not paid the cost advance. At the time of filing the complaint with the Federal Court, the complainant was already living in emergency accommodation and requested a declaration of the illegality of the eviction. The Federal Court examined the complaint.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_288/2025: Decision regarding non-admission of a complaint on tax assessment discretion
Summary of the facts
A.________ lodged a complaint in public law matters against a decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, which did not consider his complaint regarding the tax assessment discretion for the tax years 2012–2020. A.________ requests the annulment of the decision and the forwarding of the case to the lower court or the cantonal tax office. He also seeks a declaration of the illegality of the assessment discretion as well as free legal assistance.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_659/2025: Ruling on non-admission decision regarding appeal in a criminal matter
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed an appeal against a first-instance ruling of the District Court of Willisau, which convicted him of unlawful appropriation and sentenced him to a conditional fine. The reasoned judgment was reported to him by post for collection, but he did not collect it, which according to the law triggers the fiction of delivery. The complainant did not submit an appeal statement within the stipulated 20-day period, which is why the Cantonal Court of Lucerne did not consider the appeal.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
8C_172/2025: Ruling on accident insurance: Causality questions regarding ongoing complaints
Summary of the facts
A.________, a lifeguard, suffered an accident on June 16, 2020, resulting in an injury to his right knee. He was insured for accidents with the Swiss Accident Insurance Institution (Suva). After an operation on July 9, 2020, the insured gradually resumed work and was fully able to work from November 4, 2020. Suva decided to stop further benefits from July 8, 2020, as the ongoing complaints were no longer deemed related to the accident. Following the insured's objection, Suva confirmed its decision. The cantonal authority ordered an expert assessment, based on which it ruled in favor of the insured and mandated Suva to provide benefits beyond July 8, 2020.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_139/2025: Compensation of the free legal representative in a divorce proceeding
Summary of the facts
The complainant was appointed as a free legal advisor in a divorce proceeding. After submitting his bill, he requested a fee based on a dispute value of CHF 370,853.--. The District Court of Bremgarten set the compensation significantly lower. The Cantonal Court of Aargau partially corrected the compensation upward, but based on a reduced dispute value. The complainant accused this approach of misapplying Art. 91 ZPO and demanded the calculation based on the original dispute value.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_535/2025: Ruling of the Federal Court on sexual coercion and rape
Summary of the facts
A.________ was originally convicted of sexual coercion, rape, and other offenses to an 11-year prison sentence. The appellate instance reduced the sentence to 30 months, dropping some charges. The Federal Court found that the previous instance was arbitrary in its assessment, as it mistakenly assumed that the plaintiffs had consented. After further proceedings, A.________ was again found guilty of sexual coercion and rape in several cases, applying various forms of manipulation and coercion to induce the plaintiffs to engage in sexual acts.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
2C_657/2023: Decision on the contestability of tender documents in the invitation procedure
Summary of the facts
The municipality of Surses awarded winter service work for five years in an invitation procedure. After the contract was awarded to B.________ AG, A.________ SA filed a complaint, criticizing in particular the weighting of the award criteria in the tender documents. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden dismissed the complaint, arguing that the weighting should have been challenged immediately upon receipt of the tender documents. A.________ SA appealed the decision to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_602/2025: Decision regarding the complaint against rulings in the area of false titles
Summary of the facts
A.A.________ was convicted by the cantonal court of Valais for false title (Art. 251 para. 1 lit. 1 StGB). She had forged her husband's signature on several documents, including a debt acknowledgment, a declaration regarding the joint household, and an insurance application. She was sentenced to 125 daily fines with a daily fine of 50 CHF (with a two-year conditional sentence) and a fine of 1,000 CHF. Additionally, she was ordered to cover the procedural costs and to pay damages of 8,960 CHF to B.A.________. A.A.________ filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_556/2024: Odor emissions from animal husbandry facility: Complaint from the Canton of Fribourg
Summary of the facts
A.________ complains about disturbing odor emissions from the animal husbandry facility of his neighbor B.________ in the municipality of U.________. Although the cantonal office for the environment (AfU) found that the minimum distances to the residential zone were complied with and no excessive emissions were detected, it issued instructions for improving the situation. Following further complaints, the cantonal directorate for spatial development, infrastructure, mobility, and environment rejected A.________'s request for emission-reducing measures. The Cantonal Court of Fribourg, II. Administrative Court, subsequently upheld A.________'s complaint. The State Council of the Canton of Fribourg appealed this ruling to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_251/2025: Assessment of the admissibility of a possible passive co-litigant in civil proceedings
Summary of the facts
The A.________ Inc. II (complainant) seeks damages from B.________, Inc. (respondent) for the loss of nine sea freight containers during a shipping voyage. After a conciliation procedure in which a possible passive co-litigant was formed, the first instance did not consider the claim due to the invalidity of the claim authorization. The appellate court confirmed this decision, which was challenged before the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_795/2025: Decision on the formal inadmissibility of a complaint in a criminal matter
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the decision of the Chambre pénale d'appel et de révision of the Cour de justice of the Canton of Geneva from August 28, 2025. The lower court had declared a revision requested by A.________ as inadmissible. In the original ruling of the police court of the Canton of Geneva from March 27, 2025, A.________ was found guilty on several points and sentenced to 15 months of imprisonment, a fine, and a penalty. The execution of the prison sentence was suspended in favor of a measure.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_410/2025: Ruling regarding sentencing in assistance to qualified violations of the Narcotics Act
Summary of the facts
The complainant was sentenced by the Cantonal Court of Bern for assistance to quantitatively and organized qualified violations of the Narcotics Act, money laundering, and forgery of documents to 54 months of imprisonment and a conditional fine of 50 daily fines. With his appeal, he requested a conditional prison sentence of 10 months or the referral back to the lower court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_317/2025: Ruling on the recovery of an invalidity pension from occupational pension
Summary of the facts
A.________, a partner in a construction company, has received an invalidity pension from occupational pension (CHF 9,000.- annually) since 2014 due to a disability degree of 25% following an accident. In 2021, Tellco pk decided, after review, to retroactively suspend the pension entitlement from the end of 2013 and demanded the reimbursement of all benefits paid in the amount of CHF 69,750.-.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6F_24/2025: Revision request against a ruling of the Federal Court regarding a criminal conviction
Summary of the facts
The requester, A.________, was convicted by the Federal Criminal Court for endangerment by explosives, qualified property damage, and attempted acquisition of explosives. In a later proceeding, he was acquitted by the Federal Court regarding one fact, but another remained. He requests the revision of the Federal Court ruling on the remaining fact ('Stuttgart'), as he believes that new evidence or facts exist that could prove his innocence.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_585/2025: Ruling on criminal law (attempted coercion, coercion, and sexual coercion)
Summary of the facts
A.A.________ was initially convicted by the Tribunal des III. Arrondissements for the districts of Martigny and St-Maurice for multiple serious offenses, including coercion, attempted coercion, and sexual coercion, to a prison sentence of 6 years and an expulsion of 10 years. This decision was partially reformed by the II. Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Valais; the sentence was reduced to 60 months, but the convictions and further conditions (including financial compensation) were confirmed. A.A.________ appealed against this decision to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
2C_590/2024: Revocation of residence permit due to a suspected sham marriage
Summary of the facts
The Vietnamese citizen A.________ and the Bulgarian citizen B.________ married in 2019 and moved to Switzerland for work and family reunification. The migration office of the Canton of Zurich revoked the residence permit of the complainant in April 2024, citing an alleged sham marriage. The complainants filed a complaint, whose legal remedies were unsuccessful at the cantonal level. The Federal Court assesses the case following a complaint in public law matters.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_119/2025: Federal Court ruling on sexual assaults and rape
Summary of the facts
A.A. was convicted by the Geneva criminal court on May 5, 2023, for sexual acts with minors, rape, attempted rape, incest, and other offenses. He received a prison sentence of eight years and was expelled from Switzerland for eight years, in addition to further conditions. An appeal process led to a partial increase in compensation to the victims, which A.A. rejected. There were extensive witness testimonies detailing A.A.'s actions, including the testimonies of two affected daughters. A.A. was accused of having sexually abused his daughter B.A. since 2016 and of having drugged her drink on March 26, 2022, to manipulate her. The plaintiff denied these allegations and filed a complaint with the Federal Court, which challenged the rejection of additional evidence requests.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_645/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint due to expiry and lack of justification
Summary of the facts
The lower court (Chambre pénale d'appel et de révision of the Cour de justice of the Canton of Geneva) had convicted the complainant A.________ for rape, threats, deprivation of liberty, and various other offenses to a prison sentence of ten years and an expulsion of ten years. It was also ordered that the expulsion be registered in the Schengen Information System. A.________ was further sentenced to pay damages to three victims totaling 45,000 Swiss francs.
The complainant filed a complaint with the aim of overturning or postponing the ordered expulsion.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_1210/2024: Decision on the right to appeal against non-admission orders
Summary of the facts
A complainant (A.________) filed a criminal complaint against unknown and the company B.________ SA for alleged fraud and competition violations. The complaint essentially concerned the calculation of an amount of 540 CHF for "Premium-SMS". The responsible public prosecutor of the Canton of Fribourg issued a non-admission order. The complainant subsequently unsuccessfully appealed before a cantonal authority and eventually approached the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5D_38/2025: Ruling on subsidiary constitutional complaint regarding compensation claim
Summary of the facts
A complainant sought compensation of CHF 25,000.-- from the respondent, the lawyer of his ex-wife and daughter, for alleged personal injury, discrimination, and unilateral changes to visitation rights from a divorce ruling in 2014. The District Court of Zurich dismissed the claim against the respondent. The Cantonal Court of Zurich subsequently dismissed the appeal filed, to the extent it considered it. The complainant filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court, although the necessary dispute value for a civil complaint was not reached.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
8C_618/2024: Decision on accident insurance and disability pension
Summary of the facts
The complainant was insured against accidents as a secondary school teacher and suffered a mild traumatic brain injury in 2010. After a transitional pension until April 2020 and other benefits, the insurance denied entitlement to a disability pension. The lower court dismissed his complaint against this, and the matter was returned to the cantonal authority after a partial favorable ruling by the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
2D_24/2024: Inadmissibility of the complaint against the written attorney exam
Summary of the facts
The complainant took the written attorney exam in the fall of 2023 in the Canton of Aargau and failed to meet the required average grade of 4.0. The attorney commission of the Canton of Aargau evaluated the exam results and determined that the written exam was not passed. After an unsuccessful complaint procedure with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau, the complainant filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court, primarily requesting that the exam be declared passed.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_130/2025: Ruling on the timeliness of an opposition against a penalty order
Summary of the facts
A.________ was sentenced by penalty order on October 7, 2024, for attempted coercion to a fine of 60 daily fines and a penalty of 600 CHF. He filed an opposition against this penalty order on October 22, 2024. The responsible district court deemed the opposition late and declared it inadmissible on November 8, 2024. The cantonal appeal chamber of the Canton of Vaud confirmed this decision on December 4, 2024, in its ruling.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_528/2025: Decision on the question of jurisdiction and anonymization in the opposition to recovery decisions in the area of AHV
Summary of the facts
The heirs and executors of C.________, as well as other parties involved, had lodged an opposition against decisions of the Caisse interprofessionnelle AVS, which had newly established the personal contribution obligations of C.________ for the period 2007 to 2015 based on corrected tax data. After the opposition was rejected, the parties appealed to the cantonal authority, which partially overturned the decision and referred the matter back to the administration for further assessment. A complaint in public law was filed against the cantonal decision with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4D_148/2025: Non-admission of a complaint regarding a debt enforcement decision
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Zurich. It did not consider his previously lodged complaint and his request for free legal assistance related to a debt enforcement decision. The complainant failed to meet the formal requirements for submitting the complaint, particularly the requirement for hand-signing within the deadline.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.