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 following 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.
6B_853/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against the ruling of the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Zurich, which had convicted him of threats, multiple discrimination, incitement to hatred, and multiple insults. The complainant also requested a change of his public defender and a "stop" to all deadlines. The Federal Court deemed the timely filed complaint and the requested measures as unfounded or inadmissible.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The contested ruling of the Court of Appeal was delivered to the complainant on September 8, 2025. The 30-day deadline for filing a complaint ended on October 8, 2025. The submission dated October 11, 2025, was late. The earlier submission dated October 1, 2025, was timely. - **E.2:** A stop or extension of the statutory complaint deadline is inadmissible (Art. 100 para. 1 and Art. 47 para. 1 BGG). The complainant should have organized a new lawyer in time. The conditions for an official appointment of a lawyer are not met. - **E.3:** The timely filed submission of the complainant did not meet the justification requirements of Art. 42 para. 2 and 106 para. 2 BGG, nor did it substantively address the considerations of the lower court. Thus, the complaint is inadmissible. - **E.4:** Due to the hopelessness, the request for free legal assistance was denied. Reduced court costs are imposed on the complainant.
Summary of the Decision
The complaint was not upheld, the request for free legal assistance was denied, and court costs were imposed.
6B_793/2025: Justification of a Complaint in Criminal Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The complainant had filed an objection against a penal order in a criminal proceeding but failed to appear at the main hearing without excuse. According to Art. 356 para. 4 StPO, this was considered a withdrawal of the objection in legal force. A subsequently filed complaint was rejected by the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Aargau due to insufficient justification. The complainant then approached the Federal Court and requested a referral back to the lower court for re-evaluation.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The complainant did not appear at the main hearing without excuse, which led to the objection against the penal order being considered withdrawn according to Art. 356 para. 4 StPO. The Court of Appeal of the Canton of Aargau did not address the complainant's appeal due to inadequate justification. - **E.2:** A complaint to the Federal Court requires a clear justification according to Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG. However, the complainant did not explain in what way the court's non-appearance was legally erroneous. - **E.3:** The complainant introduced new facts and substantial assertions that cannot be the subject of the proceedings before the Federal Court. These are inadmissible according to Art. 99 para. 1 BGG. - **E.4:** The Federal Court found that the complaint did not meet the statutory justification requirements and therefore did not address it.
Summary of the Decision
The Federal Court did not address the complaint and imposed court costs on the complainant.
9C_484/2025: Decision on the Complaint Regarding Pension Claims in Old Age and Survivors' Insurance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against a decision of the insurance court of the Canton of Ticino. The court had declared A.________'s complaint against a notification from the cantonal compensation office dated July 3, 2025, regarding a widow's pension inadmissible due to lack of appealability of the notification.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1** The Federal Court examines both its jurisdiction and the admissibility of complaints ex officio and without restriction (Art. 29 para. 1 BGG). The admissibility of a complaint requires, among other things, sufficient justification, which relates to the subject of the dispute and must meet the formal requirements for a specific challenge of the inadmissibility reasons of the lower court in this case. - **E.2** A.________'s complaint solely concerns the substantive question of alleged unequal treatment between divorced women and widows. However, there is a lack of explanations regarding the inadmissibility of the lower court's ruling, which is the subject of these proceedings. Therefore, the complaint does not meet the formal requirements of the BGG and is obviously inadmissible. - **E.3** Given the clear inadmissibility, the procedure is simplified according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG. The complaint is handled without further effort.
Summary of the Decision
The complaint was declared inadmissible, the request for free legal assistance was denied, and no court costs were imposed.
6B_221/2024: Ruling Regarding the Principle of Indictment, Establishment of Facts, and Sentencing in Connection with Drug Offenses
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ was found guilty of multiple qualified violations of the Narcotics Act (BetmG) and sentenced to a prison term of five years and nine months, along with an eight-year expulsion from the country. He is accused of accompanying drug transports and assisting in cross-border importations of cocaine. This conviction is based on two transports totaling 5,185 grams of pure cocaine, which were carried out in December 2018 and February 2019.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
8C_474/2025: Interim Decision on the Request for Free Legal Assistance in the Disability Insurance Dispute
Summary of the Facts
The complainant submitted a request for free legal assistance to the Federal Administrative Court in connection with his complaint against a decision by the IV office for insured persons abroad (IVSTA). The Federal Administrative Court rejected the request due to a lack of proof of financial need and set a cost advance. The complainant then appealed to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_1074/2024: Decision on the Creation of a DNA Profile in a Criminal Investigation
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is suspected of having possessed a total of 5,005 grams of marijuana in a rented room of a restaurant in U.________ on April 18, 2024. The public prosecutor's office in Frauenfeld ordered the creation of a DNA profile using a cheek swab on April 26, 2024, to which A.________ unsuccessfully objected at the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Thurgau. A.________ then appealed against this decision to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
2C_652/2024: Decision on the Question of Admittance in a Request for a Residence Permit as a Hardship Case
Summary of the Facts
The Tunisian national A.________, a divorced mother of two children with a residence permit, applied for a residence permit as a hardship case after the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich denied an extension of her derived permit. Concurrently, she requested free legal assistance. The request was denied by the Migration Office, the Security Directorate, and the Administrative Court, stating that there was no significant change in circumstances that would justify a substantive review. The Federal Court had to decide on the question of admissibility.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_89/2025: Obligation to Dismantle an Extension of a Room Addition and Issues of Forfeiture in Planning and Building Law
Summary of the Facts
The complainants are the owners of a holiday home in Küssnacht. The contentious issue is an extension of a room addition and whether the authorities can demand a dismantling, or whether the claim for restoration has lapsed due to forfeiture. The lower court denied the forfeiture and confirmed the obligation to dismantle.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
8C_29/2025: Ruling on the Causal Connection of a Psychological Health Damage
Summary of the Facts
A property manager suffered severe injuries in a car accident in 2007, including to the cervical spine, and subsequently suffered from psychological and physical complaints. After a time-limited disability pension, the accident insurance (Allianz) terminated further benefits as of October 31, 2013, on the grounds that the causal connection of the psychological health damage was not established. The case was addressed in the objection procedure and before the Zug Administrative Court. The court affirmed the causal connection and ordered Allianz to reassess the claims considering the psychological consequences of the accident.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_891/2025: Ruling on Recusal and Filing of Complaints
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a recusal request against the presiding public prosecutor, which was denied by the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Bern, describing a complaint against it as a "gross error in judgment." A.________ ultimately filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court, accompanied by a recusal request against two Federal Judges, based on their prior involvement and party affiliation.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_53/2025: Ruling on Tax Deductibility and Expiration in State and Municipal Taxes as well as Direct Federal Tax
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ GmbH, active in the field of trust and business consulting, reported claims for work begun amounting to CHF 300,000 in its 2019 annual financial statements. In 2020, it made various bookings, including an expense of CHF 66,685 related to this work. The tax administration of the Canton of Graubünden considered this amount as business-related non-justified expenses and assessed the taxpayers for the 2020 tax period accordingly. The objection and subsequent complaint to the Administrative Court were unsuccessful. The complaint was then directed at the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6F_32/2025: Inadmissibility of the Request for Revision Regarding Expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The applicant requested a revision of a ruling of the Federal Court dated January 15, 2025, which had rejected a complaint against the expulsion ordered by the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Bern. The expulsion followed a conviction for various offenses, including attempted murder and coercion. The applicant presented new facts that are supposed to concern the welfare of the child, including an alleged autism and heart disease of his son.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4D_171/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against Tenant Eviction
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was ordered to vacate his apartment properly by August 25, 2025 (E.1). The Court of Appeal of the Canton of Solothurn confirmed this decision. The complainant unsuccessfully filed a complaint with the Federal Court (E.2).
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_905/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court examines a complaint from A.________ against a decision by the Tribunal cantonal de l'État de Fribourg, which declared her cantonal appeal against a decision to dismiss by the cantonal public prosecutor as inadmissible due to insufficient justification.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_532/2025: Inadmissibility of the Voting Complaint Regarding the Federal Referendum
Summary of the Facts
Markus Bolliger filed a voting complaint with the government of the Canton of Zurich, alleging irregularities in the run-up to the federal referendum on September 28, 2025, regarding the federal resolution on cantonal property taxes on second homes. The government did not address it due to lack of jurisdiction. Bolliger then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_430/2025: Dismissal Due to Lack of Subject Matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ had filed a complaint against a decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zug regarding the demand for a cost advance in connection with a health insurance matter. After the filing of the complaint, the Administrative Court clarified that the originally set deadline for the payment of the cost advance was void due to a request for free legal assistance, and that a new deadline would be set in case of a denial of the request. This deprived the complaint of its subject matter, rendering the proceedings before the Federal Court moot.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_1370/2024: Request for Removal of Files Due to Alleged Inadmissibility of Evidence
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of Basel-Stadt is conducting a criminal investigation against several suspects, including A.________, on suspicion of professional fraud, disloyal management, and forgery. A.________ requested the removal of two confessions of a co-defendant from the files, arguing that they were allegedly obtained using a prohibited evidence-gathering method. The Public Prosecutor's Office and the Appeals Court of Basel-Stadt rejected the request, after which A.________ filed a complaint before the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_55/2024: Decision on the Calculation of Disability and Survivors' Pensions
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns a dispute between the pension fund of the Canton of Vaud (CPEV) and the heir (husband) of a deceased (B.________) regarding the calculation of disability and survivors' pensions from occupational pension schemes. The deceased worked as a judge from 1992 to 2008 and then as a teacher until 2011. She had been unable to work since 2007 and passed away in September 2017. The disputed question was whether the pensions should be calculated based on the last salary as a judge or teacher.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4F_7/2025: Request for Revision Regarding Court Costs and Party Compensation in the Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The applicants (heirs of the deceased A.A.________) seek in the present proceedings the amendment of a previous revision decision of the Federal Court (4F_22/2024). This decision had annulled the ruling of the Federal Court in the proceedings 4A_554/2013 but did not decide on the reallocation of court costs and party compensations in this proceeding. The plaintiffs argue that these costs should be newly regulated due to the granting of the revision. The respondents partially request dismissal, partially the inadmissibility of the request.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
2C_187/2025: Revocation or Non-extension of the Residence Permit
Summary of the Facts
This concerns the question of whether the residence permits of the Canadian citizen A.________, her two sons, and their claim for family reunification due to an alleged sham marriage with her Swiss husband need to be extended. The lower court classified the marriage as a sham marriage and denied the claim for extension of the permit.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_584/2025: Ruling on the Extradition of a German National to Poland
Summary of the Facts
The German national A.________ was sought by the Polish authorities via an international arrest warrant, as he is accused of having circulated or prepared counterfeit banknotes. He was arrested upon entering Switzerland on March 13, 2025. The Federal Office of Justice (BJ) approved his extradition to Poland. A complaint against the extradition and a request for release from custody were rejected by the Federal Criminal Court. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Court, requesting, among other things, the refusal of extradition, release from custody, and free legal assistance and representation.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_214/2025: Entitlement to Intensive Care Allowance
Summary of the Facts
The respondent A.________, born in 2017, receives benefits from the disability insurance (IV) due to Down syndrome and a congenital epilepsy. After a request for helplessness compensation, she was initially granted a slight, later a moderate degree of compensation, but no intensive care allowance (decisions of April 21, 2020, March 22, 2021, and July 31, 2024). The Insurance Court of the Canton of St. Gallen granted her the allowance retroactively from September 1, 2023, after which the IV office appealed to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_596/2025: Inadmissibility in Case of Qualified Violation of the Narcotics Act
Summary of the Facts
A.________ traveled on March 17, 2024, from Brazil via Zurich to India and carried 7,319 grams of pure cocaine in his luggage. This was seized in Zurich. Before the Federal Court, A.________ requests acquittal, reduction of the prison sentence, or referral back to the lower court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_646/2025: Complaint Due to Denial of Rights Against the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Aargau
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was convicted in the first instance by the District Court of Aarau for several offenses. After the delivery of the decision but without filing an appeal, his defense attorney requested a justification of the judgment. The Court of Appeal pointed out that an appeal could only have been made through its registration. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court due to denial of rights.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_724/2024: Ruling on Sentencing, Compensation, and Satisfaction
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was found guilty by the District Court of Zurich of multiple attempted instigation to multiple murders as well as various other offenses. He was sentenced to a prison term of 5½ years and ordered to pay a fine. The appeal led to a ruling by the Court of Appeal of Zurich, which imposed a prison term of 6½ years, a fine, and an expulsion from the country. A complaint to the Federal Court resulted in a referral back to the Court of Appeal, which convicted A.________ only for violation of the Narcotics Act and imposed a conditional prison sentence of 18 months, a conditional fine, and a fine. It also awarded A.________ compensation and damages for excessive detention. A.________ is requesting with the current complaint a complete annulment of the ruling and cessation of the proceedings.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_517/2025: Inadmissibility of a Complaint in a Procedure for Attempted Coercion and Other Charges
Summary of the Facts
The complainant is appealing against the ruling of the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Bern dated January 8, 2025, which convicted him, among other things, for attempted coercion and other offenses to a conditional fine and a minor fine. He filed a complaint with the Federal Court. However, the complaint submissions were submitted late by post, and the presumption of late posting according to the postmark could not be disproved.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.