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 present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositions. For the further 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_458/2025: Serious Violation of the Narcotics Act
Summary of Facts
The appellant, an Eritrean national, was convicted of serious violation of the Narcotics Act (BetmG). He was accused of being active in international drug trafficking by transporting and delivering large quantities of cocaine. The lower courts imposed a prison sentence of four years, as well as a ban on residence for ten years, along with an entry in the Schengen Information System (SIS).
Summary of Considerations
- **E.1**: The Federal Court examined the appellant's allegations that there was an arbitrary determination of the facts and a violation of the principle *in dubio pro reo*. The court found that the cantonal instance based its findings on a multitude of consistent indications and that there was no arbitrariness. The classification of the appellant as an accomplice (and not just as an accessory) was upheld. - **E.2**: Regarding the determination of the penalty, the Federal Court noted that the cantonal instances correctly assessed the seriousness of the offense, including the large quantity of cocaine and the international aspect of drug trafficking. The demand for a partial or complete suspension of the sentence was rejected. - **E.3**: The ordered ban on residence for the appellant was deemed proportionate. Given the seriousness of the offense, no exceptional personal hardship was found that would justify a departure from the standard ban. The entry in the Schengen Information System was also deemed appropriate and proportionate.
Summary of Disposition
The appeal is dismissed and the court costs of 1,200 francs are imposed on the appellant.
6B_665/2025: Judgment of the Federal Court on the Proportionality of the Penalty
Summary of Facts
A.________ was convicted by the District Court of Veveyse on October 3, 2022, for violence, sexual violence, rape, and unauthorized access to a computer system, and was sentenced to three years in prison, of which two years were suspended. On December 20, 2023, the Cantonal Court of Fribourg reduced the sentence to two years, suspended for five years. However, the Federal Court accepted the prosecution's request on November 7, 2024, annulled the judgment, and referred the case for a new decision. On June 6, 2025, the Cantonal Court sentenced A.________ to 33 months in prison, 12 months unconditional and 21 months conditional. A.________ filed an appeal against this judgment and requested a reduction of the sentence to 24 months with full enforcement or alternatively a reduction of the unconditional sentence to 3 to 6 months.
Summary of Considerations
1. The appellant argues that his right to a hearing was violated, as the Cantonal Court rejected a requested postponement of the hearing on June 6, 2025. The Federal Court emphasizes that the appellant was willing to participate in an audiovisual hearing, thereby not violating the right to participate in the hearing. 2.1. The appellant contests the severity of the sentence, claiming it does not correspond to the severity of his behavior. The Federal Court notes that the determination of sentences is at the discretion of the judge but must not exceed the legal framework. In this case, it was found that the demanded sentence of 24 months, which the appellant requests, is clearly too low. 2.2. The appellant contests that he was not granted a complete suspension of the sentence, which is, however, impermissible since the sentence exceeds 2 years. The penalty imposed by the Cantonal Court was deemed appropriate, and the reasons for a suspensive effect are insufficient.
Summary of Disposition
The Federal Court dismissed the appellant's complaint and confirmed the sentence of 33 months, and the court costs were also imposed on him.
6B_475/2025: Decision on Appeals Regarding Negligent Simple Bodily Injury, Arbitrariness, and Violation of the Right to be Heard
Summary of Facts
The parties A.________ and B.________, employees of the ski company D.________ SA, were responsible for the proper functioning of a ski lift with statutory safety requirements. On February 29, 2016, Belgian tourist C.________ was severely injured after a collision with a ski lift bar. The lower court convicted the appellants of negligent simple bodily injury under Art. 125 para. 1 of the Penal Code. Both were sentenced to fines with a two-year probation period. The appellants contest this decision.
Summary of Considerations
- **E.2**: The principle *ne bis in idem* was not violated. There were new evidences and facts that justified the reopening of the previous discontinuation decision (Art. 323 para. 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code).
- **E.3**: The appellant B.________ was able to exercise his right to be heard but did not make any further evidentiary requests, so there is no violation of Art. 6 para. 3 of the ECHR or Art. 29 para. 2 of the Federal Constitution.
- **E.4**: The objections raised against the weight of the expertise conducted regarding the height of the snow cover and the distance of the ski lift bar to the snow surface were deemed unfounded. The lower court was able to rely on the results of the expertise without arbitrariness.
- **E.5**: The lower court did not arbitrarily determine the facts nor violate the presumption of innocence. Due to the circumstances, there was no uncertainty regarding the course of the accident and the relevant factors.
- **E.6**: Negligence was affirmed for both appellants, as they violated their duty of care (e.g., checking the snow depth and considering safety requirements). The lower court correctly found that the victim's injuries were in a natural and adequate causal connection to the appellants' omissions.
Summary of Disposition
The appeals were dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on the appellants, while no party compensation was awarded.
2C_369/2025: Review of a Restriction Order under Art. 74 AIG Against a Foreign National
Summary of Facts
The Indian national A.________, against whom a valid expulsion decision exists, complained about the restriction ordered by the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich to the district of V.________ and its spatial adjustment by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich as disproportionate. The Federal Court confirmed the restriction considering the extended framework conditions (inclusion of the residence of his children). The restriction serves to ensure the execution of the expulsion and is deemed proportionate by the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_405/2025: Judgment on International Sports Arbitration
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a former Serbian football player, claims outstanding payments from a Polish football club as the alleged legal successor of an insolvent club. Previous FIFA decisions and a proceeding before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) did not yield favorable results for him. After a renewed disciplinary proceeding, the CAS rejected the player's claims, citing the binding nature of its previous decision (res iudicata). In an appeal to the Federal Court, he claimed a violation of the right to be heard.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_722/2024: Protective Measures of the Marital Community (Maintenance Contributions)
Summary of Facts
A.A.________ (born 1981) and B.A.________ (born 1988) married in 2008 and have two children together (born 2012 and 2016). Since February 7, 2021, they have been living separately. As part of the protective measures of the marital community, alternating custody of the children was ordered in 2022 and maintenance contributions were established, which were adjusted multiple times by the lower courts. The dispute particularly concerned the amount of maintenance contributions in favor of the wife from May 1, 2022.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_632/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Due to Insufficient Justification
Summary of Facts
The appellant was convicted by the District Court of Zurich on December 14, 2023, for mismanagement, failure to keep accounts, and multiple money laundering to a partially suspended prison sentence. The Cantonal Court of Zurich changed this sentence to an unconditional prison sentence. The appellant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against this decision, particularly alleging a violation of the right to be heard and the right to a fair trial.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_785/2024: Amendment of a Divorce Judgment Regarding Maintenance Payments
Summary of Facts
The complaint before the Federal Court concerns the amendment of a divorce judgment from 2012 regarding the maintenance payments of the appellant for his two daughters from his first marriage, B.A.________ and C.A.________. The maintenance contributions to be amended are at the center of a conflict that has unfolded over several years before the lower courts. Central issues included the examination of new facts, the financial situation of the parties, and the educational status of the children. The lower court, the Vaud Cantonal Court (Cour d'appel civile), partially amended the divorce judgment and established new maintenance contributions.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_470/2025: No Action on Complaints Regarding a Protection Contract and Building Permit
Summary of Facts
The Federal Court examined complaints from A.A.________ and B.A.________ against two judgments of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich. These concern the approval of a protection contract for a protected sycamore and the building permit for a multi-family house with a garage on the same property. Due to the connection of both proceedings, it was decided that these can only be considered as interim decisions and that neither of the decisions concludes the procedure.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_911/2025: Judgment on the Decision of Non-Admission Regarding Recusal and Free Legal Aid
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.________ requested the lower court to accept his recusal request against the responsible public prosecutor and grant him free legal aid. The Federal Court examined the appeal against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne but did not consider it due to the insufficient justification of the submission. The request for free legal aid was rejected due to hopelessness.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_588/2025: Expulsion Detention - Assessment of the Complaint by A.________
Summary of Facts
A.________, a Turkish national, applied for asylum in 2022, which was rejected in 2025. His complaint against the negative decision was dismissed by the Federal Administrative Court. He left the assigned asylum center, went underground, and was apprehended by the police on September 30, 2025. The responsible authority ordered expulsion detention, which was confirmed by the lower court. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against it.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_215/2025: Non-Admission of the Complaint
Summary of Facts
A.________ and C.________ were ordered by the Tribunal des baux et loyers in Geneva on August 28, 2025, to vacate a furnished apartment and pay the landlord B.________ SA CHF 2,800 (plus interest). A.________ filed an appeal against points 2 and 3 of the disposition, which the Chambre des baux et loyers of the Cantonal Court of Geneva declared inadmissible on September 24, 2025. Subsequently, on October 30, 2025, A.________ filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court, accompanied by a request for suspensive effect and free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_125/2025: Judgment on Claims from a Work Contract
Summary of Facts
The A.________ AG, a construction company, demands payment of CHF 259,798.65 or CHF 267,779.45 plus interest from the Canton of Basel-Stadt based on its services in the renovation of the B.________ Hall. The alleged basis is a work contract dated June 25, 2018, the existence of which is disputed by the opposing party. The lower courts dismissed the lawsuit, as the existence of the work contract was not proven.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_813/2025: Judgment on the Approval of a Random Find from Surveillance
Summary of Facts
The criminal proceedings are based on an extensive surveillance operation against three main suspects for human trafficking and other offenses. Random finds emerged that implicated the person A.________. The prosecution requested approval for the use of this information in 2022. A.________ filed a complaint against the approval, which was largely dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Bern.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_293/2025: Judgment Regarding Work Contract and Additional Claims
Summary of Facts
The A.________ AG (appellant) entered into a work contract with the municipality U.________ (respondent) for the establishment of a flood protection project, during which unexpected excess quantities and additional services occurred due to unforeseen soil conditions. The final billing was disputed through the cantonal procedure. The work contract provided for the application of SIA standard 118. The appellant claimed a further residual work wage; however, the lower courts only recognized a partial amount as owed.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5F_63/2025: Inadmissibility of the Revision Request
Summary of Facts
The decision concerns a revision request against the judgment of the Federal Court (5A_503/2025) of September 10, 2025, which declared a complaint against a judgment of the lower court (decision of June 4, 2025, of the Court of Enforcement and Bankruptcy of the Cantonal Tribunal of Vaud) inadmissible. The original judgment of the Federal Court declared the complaint inadmissible due to a late payment of the cost advance. The rejection of free legal aid became final in the previous proceedings. A request for revision under Art. 121 et seq. BGG was filed on October 6, 2025. The revision request was deemed unclear and unfounded. In particular, it was considered inadmissible because it was filed too late (Art. 124 para. 1 lit. b BGG). The request for the rejection of Federal judges was deemed abusive by the Federal Court and was therefore dismissed. The court costs in the amount of 800 francs were imposed on the applicant. Further treatment of similar submissions from the applicant is reserved.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_664/2025: Will and Inheritance Contract in Conflict
Summary of Facts
The deceased E.A. had created a will in which he disinherited his son A.A. and instead designated his grandson I.A. as the heir. However, this entry regulation contradicted an earlier inheritance contract in which E.A. had stipulated that his three children inherit equally. After E.A.'s death, the division of the estate and the question of the annulment of the will and the disinheritance of A.A. became contentious. A.A. subsequently attempted to reintegrate certain estate values and allegedly unlawful gifts to other heirs back into the estate.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_581/2025: Non-Admission of the Complaint
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a Greek national, applied for an extension of his EU/EFTA residence permit, which had been valid until February 11, 2024. On November 11, 2024, the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich rejected the extension and ordered his expulsion. Two delivered letters were not picked up in time, and the deadline for filing an appeal expired on December 20, 2024. A request for the restoration of the deadline was rejected by the Security Directorate of the Canton of Zurich. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich confirmed this decision, after which the appellant filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_358/2025: Judgment Regarding Attempted Murder and Order for Inpatient Therapeutic Measures
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.________ is accused of having severely injured B.________ with a hammer on the head in Basel on June 26, 2022. The Court of Appeals of the Canton of Basel-Stadt qualified this act as attempted murder but established his insanity due to paranoid schizophrenia and ordered inpatient therapeutic measures.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_658/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Due to Lack of Cost Advance
Summary of Facts
The appellant had filed a complaint against a judgment of the Cour d'appel pénale des Tribunal cantonal des Kantons Waadt in a criminal matter. The complaint was declared inadmissible due to the lack of timely payment of the cost advance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_76/2025: Legitimacy Check in Banking Transactions and Approval
Summary of Facts
The appellant, majority shareholder of a corporate group, held various accounts and deposits through a bank, including a category account that allegedly was opened based on a presumably forged signature by a former client advisor. Numerous payments in the millions were made through this account, ultimately leading to a financial loss for the appellant. The bank argued, based on agreements and terms and conditions, that the appellant is liable for any possible damage since there was no gross negligence on the part of the bank and the transactions are deemed approved.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_518/2025: Withdrawal of Complaint in a Civil Procedure Before the Federal Court
Summary of Facts
The appellants A.________ and B.________ filed a complaint on October 15, 2025, against the judgment of the Civil Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Valais dated September 11, 2025. The subject of the dispute concerned an expulsion and a revision. On November 3, 2025, the legal representative of the appellants informed the Federal Court that the complaint had been withdrawn.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_897/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint and Rejection of the Request for Free Legal Aid
Summary of Facts
A.________ requested an adjustment of the protective measures in marriage from the first-instance court in Geneva, which reduced or suspended his maintenance obligations. After a rejected request for free legal aid and a non-fulfilled cost advance demand from the lower court, A.________ repeatedly brought the matters before higher instances, including the Federal Court, which had already made negative decisions in previous judgments. The current point of contention concerns the obligation to pay the cost advance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_712/2024: Dismissal of the Complaint Due to Non-Admission of the Criminal Investigation
Summary of Facts
The appellant filed a criminal complaint for fraud against the accused. He claimed that the accused had intentionally concealed the financial situation of a company, which led him to financial obligations. On October 3, 2023, the Geneva Public Prosecutor's Office rejected the taking of evidence and the opening of the criminal investigation. The Chambre pénale de recours des Cantons de Genève dismissed the appellant's appeal against the non-admission decision of the Public Prosecutor's Office on May 24, 2024. The lower court found that there was insufficient suspicion for the alleged fraud. The appellant filed a complaint with the Federal Court and requested the annulment of the non-admission decision and referral to the lower court or the Public Prosecutor's Office for the resumption of the criminal investigation.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_520/2025: Decision 6B_520/2025
Summary of Facts
A.________ was convicted by the Criminal Court of the Saanen District (FR) for rape, attempted sexual coercion, attempted coercion, as well as eavesdropping and recording conversations between other individuals to a prison sentence of 36 months, of which 12 months were unconditional and 24 months conditional. The conditional sentence was linked to psychotherapeutic care. The Cantonal Court of Fribourg confirmed this judgment in full. A.________ requested the Federal Court to annul the convictions and the sentence.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_527/2024: Judgment on the Refusal to Extend a Residence Permit After the Dissolution of the Marital Community
Summary of Facts
A.________, a national of Colombia, received a residence permit in Switzerland due to his marriage to a Swiss citizen. However, the marital community was dissolved no later than October 7, 2022, and the amicable divorce occurred on January 12, 2023. His request for an extension of the residence permit was denied as the necessary requirements under Art. 50 para. 1 lit. a AIG were not met.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_743/2024: Judgment Regarding Disability Insurance (Disability Pension)
Summary of Facts
The appellant applied twice to the IV Office of the Canton of Aargau for benefits. After a work accident in 2016, which resulted in amputations of the right hand, an SMAB assessment was obtained. Based on this, the IV Office granted a full disability pension for the period from July 1, 2017, to May 31, 2018. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed the complaint against it. The appellant requested a permanent full pension or referral for further clarification before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_428/2025: Judgment on Disability Insurance
Summary of Facts
The appellant, A.________, worked part-time as a veterinary practice assistant. After being completely unable to work since February 2023, she applied for benefits to the IV Office of Bern due to "burnout." By decision of November 21, 2024, the IV Office rejected the application, stating that there was no health impairment with disabling effects in the legal sense. The Administrative Court of Bern confirmed the rejection on June 17, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.