Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we provide detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositions. For the other judgments, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all judgments are available on the Lexplorer portal. There, you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your areas of law.
6B_924/2023: Public Incitement to Crime and Extension of an Acquitting Judgment
Summary of the Facts
The proceedings concern several complaints against two judgments of the Bern Cantonal Court (from June 8, 2023, and February 12, 2024). The allegations are based on criminal responsibility related to the presentation of a banner with the slogan "KILL ER DOGAN with his own weapons!" and an image of Turkish President Erdogan with a gun to his head during a rally. The Cantonal Court found the four defendants guilty of the offense of public incitement to crimes under Article 259 paragraph 1 of the Swiss Penal Code and imposed fines. Additionally, it rejected a request from another complainant for the extension of an acquitting first-instance judgment to him. It refrained from reassessing the first-instance awards despite a changed question of guilt.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court consolidated the proceedings due to the close factual connection. The lower court identified complainants 3 and 5 based on the image material and deemed the actions not arbitrary, as distinctive facial features were recognizable. The Federal Court confirms that the complainants do not fall under the media privilege (Article 28 of the Penal Code), as they acted as the author of the banner and consciously spread its message. The banner was assessed according to objective standards as a clear and compelling call for the killing of Turkish President Erdogan and met the criteria of Article 259 of the Penal Code. The lower court found that the complainants acted with direct intent. They were aware of the banner and consciously pursued its presentation, even though there was no specific intent to kill. Public incitement in the sense of Article 259 of the Penal Code also concerns offenses abroad, provided that the behavior is also prohibited there. Public peace was disturbed by the incitement propagated in Switzerland. The Cantonal Court violated federal law by failing to reassess the first-instance compensation scheme despite the changed question of guilt. The case is referred back to the lower court for reassessment.
Summary of the Disposition
The proceedings were consolidated, the complaint of the Public Prosecutor's Office was upheld, and the case was referred back to the lower court for reassessment.
7B_1007/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of a Complaint in a Criminal Matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, filed a complaint against the decision of the Chambre pénale de recours of the Geneva Court of Justice dated August 26, 2025. It had rejected the complainant's appeal against an order from the Geneva Public Prosecutor concerning a refusal to initiate investigations. The complainant referred to an incident in January 2025, during which he was allegedly attacked by fellow inmates while in custody. In the present proceedings, the complainant did not assert any specific civil claims and did not elaborate on this further.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1.1**: The status as a complainant requires that the contested decision could potentially impact civil claims. There is a lack of precise justification or a clear reference to such claims. - **E.1.2**: The complainant neither cites possible compensation claims nor proposals for their assessment. The nature of the alleged offenses does not allow for a clear derivation of damage compensation claims. - **E.1.3**: A violation of the right to examine a criminal complaint is not asserted and is therefore irrelevant. - **E.1.4**: There is no formal procedural obstacle, such as a denial of justice, that would need to be assessed separately from the substantive side. - **E.1.5**: The obviously unfounded nature of the complaint leads to the application of a simplified procedure under Article 108 paragraph 1 lit. b BGG. The request for free legal assistance is rejected as there are no prospects of success.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint was declared inadmissible, the request for free legal assistance was rejected, and court costs were imposed.
5A_888/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against a Bankruptcy Warning
Summary of the Facts
The complainant challenged the bankruptcy warning issued by the Illnau-Effretikon Debt Enforcement Office. After his complaints were either dismissed or not dealt with by both the District Court of Pfäffikon and the Cantonal Court of Zurich, he turned to the Federal Court to have the contested decisions reviewed.
Summary of the Considerations
- (E.1) Chronological account of the procedural history: From the original issuance of the bankruptcy warning to the filing of the complaint with the Federal Court. - (E.2) Requirements for the complaint justification according to the Federal Court Act (Article 42 paragraph 2 and Article 106 paragraph 2 BGG): The complaint must demonstrate how applicable law has been violated. - (E.3) Examination of individual allegations by the complainant: - (E.3.1) Allegation of violation of the right to be heard and the principle of investigation: The complainant does not sufficiently engage with the considerations of the Cantonal Court. - (E.3.2) Criticism regarding the jurisdiction issue: The complainant's argumentation does not meet the justification requirements. - (E.3.3) Allegation of violation of the principle of equal treatment and freedom of conscience: The submissions also do not meet the requirements. - (E.3.4) Conclusion: The complaint does not contain sufficient justification, which is why it is not admitted in the simplified procedure. - (E.4) No grant of free legal assistance: The complaint is rejected due to its lack of prospects of success.
Summary of the Disposition
The court does not admit the complaint and rejects the request for free legal assistance.
7B_881/2025: Decision on a Non-Admission Order in Criminal Law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a criminal complaint against unknown persons on August 23, 2024, claiming that on May 30, 2024, he was physically attacked and robbed by three individuals, including a known "C.________". He was convinced that the perpetrators were commissioned by a person of Albanian descent. The Geneva Cantonal State Ministry issued a non-admission decision on April 16, 2025. The complaint against this decision was dismissed on July 2, 2025, by the Criminal Chamber of the Geneva Court of Justice.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_724/2025: Inadmissibility of a Complaint in Criminal Matters
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court against a decision of the Chambre pénale de recours of the Geneva Court of Justice dated July 18, 2025. The lower court had declared the requested rejection of a judge by A.________ as inadmissible. The complainant also requested free legal assistance for the proceedings before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_993/2024: Decision on the Party Status of a Defendant Company in a Criminal Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The proceedings concern the party status of C.________ S.p.A. in a criminal proceeding regarding various financial offenses allegedly committed by B.________ SA and its board members, including A.________, between 2018 and 2023. The lower court partially recognized C.________ S.p.A. as a party and annulled orders of the competent public prosecutor against the party.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_359/2025: Dismissal of the Complaint Against the Tax Assessment
Summary of the Facts
A.A. and B.A., who returned to Switzerland after a stay abroad, did not properly declare a bank account in the tax years 2011 to 2018. The funds from previous occupational pension provision were deposited in accounts, and their tax treatment forms the core of the legal dispute.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_677/2025: Formal Inadmissibility of the Complaint Due to Insufficient Justification
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Valais, Cour pénale I, dated August 11, 2025, with the Federal Court. This judgment confirmed a conviction of the complainant to 150 days' fine of CHF 10, with a probation period of five years, for defamation, threats, and attempted coercion. Additionally, contact and proximity to two persons were prohibited, civil claims were referred, procedural costs were imposed, and compensations to the two intimates were set.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_483/2025: Decision on Defense by a Lawyer in Criminal Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was deprived of the previously granted defense by a public defender by the president of the Geneva Police Court, as the proceedings were classified as not serious and not complex. A.________ filed a complaint against this decision with the Geneva Criminal Chamber, which dismissed the complaint and imposed the procedural costs on A.________. The Federal Court examined whether there was still a right to defense by a public defender in this case.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_247/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Regarding Arbitration Jurisdiction
Summary of the Facts
The city of V.________ and B.________ entered into an agreement on September 22, 2021, regarding construction measures on U.________ street in V.________, which included an arbitration clause. B.________ initiated arbitration proceedings and requested a penalty as well as compliance with certain construction tolerances. The city of V.________ contested the jurisdiction of the arbitration court. The arbitration court dismissed the objection to jurisdiction.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
11Z_1/2025: Decision on the Request for Access to Files in the Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.________ pursued B.________ due to outstanding rents and had a property registered in C.________ arrested and seized. C.________ requested access to files in the arrest proceedings. Subsequently, A.________ submitted a request for access to files, which was eventually treated at the Federal Court level.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_568/2025: Judgment on Social Assistance Refund and Procedural Preconditions
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ acquired assets due to an inheritance. The social service of the city of Wetzikon lawfully demanded a refund of social assistance received in the amount of CHF 115,699.75. The cantonal administrative court reduced the refund to CHF 96,459.75 based on a tax exemption of CHF 30,000 and partially upheld the cantonal complaint. A.________ requested the Federal Court to allow her to retain the entire inheritance.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_532/2025: Non-admission of a Complaint Regarding Supplementary Benefits for AHV/IV
Summary of the Facts
The complainant challenged the judgment of the Insurance Court of the Canton of Solothurn, which contained a partial approval of a previous complaint regarding supplementary benefits for AHV/IV. Specifically, it concerned the refund of pension arrears and their waiver requirements. The Insurance Court affirmed the good faith of the complainant but denied the existence of significant hardship for refund parts from the pension arrears of April 2022.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1015/2025: Judgment on the Detention Order
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was convicted on February 22, 2024, by the District Court of Sarine for simple bodily harm, insult, threats, attempted threats, rape, sexual acts against a non-consenting person, and violation of supervisory duties. He received a prison sentence of 48 months and a fine of 30 daily rates of CHF 10. On August 25, 2025, the Cantonal Court of Fribourg dismissed the complainant's appeal and ordered his detention for safety reasons. The complainant, who is in custody, filed a complaint with the Federal Court on September 29, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.