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 dispositions. For the subsequent rulings, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all rulings are available on the Lexplorer portal. There, you can customize your newsletter and receive the latest rulings tailored to your legal fields.
7B_901/2025: Decision regarding the unsealing of data carriers
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Bern is conducting criminal proceedings against A.________ for serious sexual offenses and violations of the Weapons Act. During a house search, several mobile phones were seized, which A.________ had sealed, invoking attorney-client privilege. The Public Prosecutor's Office later requested the unsealing of the devices. The Cantonal Court of Measures of the Canton of Bern approved the request for unsealing. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court, seeking to exclude data outside a specific period and certain chat protocols from unsealing.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines the admissibility requirements ex officio. This is an interim decision, where an irreparable disadvantage must exist according to Art. 93 para. 1 lit. a BGG. Personal data on mobile phones are not absolutely protected. Only if the interest in protecting personal rights outweighs the interest in criminal prosecution could such a disadvantage exist. Given the severity of the alleged crimes, this is not the case, so the admissibility requirements are not met. The appeal process before the Federal Court is evidently hopeless. Accordingly, the request for free legal assistance is dismissed.
Summary of the Disposition
The appeal was dismissed, the request for free legal assistance was also denied, and A.________ was ordered to pay court costs.
2C_15/2025: Dispute over the amount of compensation for free legal representation
Summary of the Facts
The Migration Office of the Canton of St. Gallen revoked B.________'s residence permit in 2018. The appeal against this decision was rejected by the Department of Security and Justice of the Canton of St. Gallen; the Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen confirmed this decision. In the present proceedings, B.________'s lawyer complained to the Federal Court about the amount of compensation awarded to him as a free legal representative.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The Federal Court notes that the appeal in public law matters can be admitted. However, the simultaneously filed subsidiary constitutional complaint is inadmissible, as the case is already accessible through ordinary legal channels. - **E.2:** It is stated that the Federal Court applies the law ex officio but only examines cantonal law to see if it violates federal law. Arbitrary application is a central standard here. - **E.3:** The Federal Court addresses the amount of the awarded compensation and confirms that the lower court correctly and non-arbitrarily determined the compensation according to the cantonal fee regulations. - **E.4:** The complaint regarding the right to be heard and arbitrariness is dismissed as the lower court did not violate any obligation to obtain a fee note. The conclusion of the proceedings was foreseeable for the appellant. - **E.5:** The court emphasizes that the flat-rate compensation according to the cantonal fee regulations is lawful and the amount of compensation is not disproportionate to the work performed.
Summary of the Disposition
The appeal was dismissed and court costs of CHF 2,000 were imposed.
7B_165/2025: Judgment on not admitting an appeal against the non-initiation of criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The Regional Public Prosecutor's Office Bern-Mittelland decided not to initiate proceedings for threats, attempted coercion, and other offenses. A.________, B.________, and C.________ appealed against this decision, which was dismissed by the Higher Court of the Canton of Bern. They brought the case to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1**: The Federal Court examines the admissibility requirements for the appeal (Art. 29 para. 1 BGG). It notes that the private plaintiff must demonstrate its standing according to the requirements of Art. 81 para. 1 BGG. Particularly strict requirements apply when the appeal is against the dismissal or non-initiation of proceedings. In this context, specific civil claims arising from the criminal act must be precisely substantiated.
**E.1.3**: The appellants do not sufficiently explain how specific civil claims arise from the alleged criminal act. There is a lack of detailed presentation of the damage, causation, and the prerequisites for satisfaction claims. Possible claims for removal or prohibition of contact are also not sufficiently justified.
**E.2**: Due to the lack of substantiation of the appeal legitimacy, the court does not admit the appeal. Furthermore, no formal complaints are raised that would justify an exception according to the "Star practice".
Summary of the Disposition
The court does not admit the appeal and imposes court costs.
2C_532/2025: Decision regarding the rejection of a judge's recusal
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns the decision of the Federal Court regarding the rejection of a request for the recusal of a judge. The appellants, an association and its president, filed a complaint against a decision of the Geneva State Council that authorized a hunting cull of deer, as well as the subsequent decision of the Geneva judicial authority. In the further proceedings, they raised allegations of bias against a federal judge due to his statements during an earlier public hearing.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_151/2025: Dispute over integrity compensation in accident insurance law
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________, insured against accidents with Suva, suffered a radius fracture in 2022. After the healing treatment, Suva discontinued benefits, rejected a disability pension, and awarded an integrity compensation of 5%. A.________ requested a higher integrity compensation of 10% and coverage for medical reports from a private expert. The cantonal lower court dismissed the appeal; A.________ then appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_491/2025: Inadmissibility of the appeal and rejection of the request for free legal aid
Summary of the Facts
The respondents 1 and 2 requested the eviction of the appellants from their single-family home. The Cantonal Court of the Canton of Glarus ordered this. In the further proceedings, the President of the Cantonal Court of Glarus set a cost advance for the appellants. The appellants let both the original deadline and a grace period expire unused and filed an appeal with the Federal Court to overturn the cost advance order.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_669/2024: Judgment regarding expulsion and its entry in the Schengen Information System
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced by the Regional Court of Berner Jura-Seeland to four years of imprisonment and a fine of CHF 200 for qualified and simple violations of the Narcotics Act. An expulsion was not ordered. The Public Prosecutor's Office appealed but limited itself to requesting an expulsion of six years and its entry in the SIS. The Higher Court of the Canton of Bern granted this request. A.________ filed an appeal against this decision with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_473/2025: Decision regarding eviction from a property
Summary of the Facts
The appellants A.A. and B.A. were ordered by the Cantonal Court of the Canton of Glarus to vacate a property in U.________. The appellants filed an objection and later an appeal with both the Higher Court of the Canton of Glarus and the Federal Court. The Federal Court decided not to admit the appeals as they either stem from an inadmissible lower court or do not meet the requirements for reasoning.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6F_29/2025: Judgment on a request for restoration of a deadline
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ requests the restoration of the deadline for the payment of the cost advance, which was required in the proceedings before the Federal Court (6B_554/2025), and the resumption of the appeal proceedings. He justifies the missed deadline with an illness and submits a medical report.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.