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 dispositive parts. For the other judgments, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all judgments are available on the portal of Lexplorer. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your areas of law.
6B_458/2025: Serious Offense Against the Narcotics Act
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, an Eritrean national, was convicted of a serious offense against the Narcotics Act (BetmG). He was accused of being involved 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 deportation order for a duration of ten years, along with an entry in the Schengen Information System (SIS).
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1**: The Federal Court examined the appellant's allegations that there had been arbitrary factual findings 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 a co-perpetrator (and not just as an accomplice) was confirmed. - **E.2**: Regarding the determination of the sentence, the Federal Court noted that the cantonal instances correctly assessed the severity of the act, including the large quantity of cocaine and the international context of drug trafficking. The request for a partial or complete suspension of the sentence was rejected. - **E.3**: The ordered deportation of the appellant was deemed proportionate. Given the severity of the offense, no extraordinary personal hardship was found that would justify a deviation from the standard deportation. The entry in the Schengen Information System was also deemed appropriate and proportionate.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
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 Sentence
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was convicted by the District Court of Vevey on October 3, 2022, of violence, sexual violence, rape, and unauthorized access to a computer system, and sentenced to three years in prison, of which two years were suspended. On December 20, 2023, the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Fribourg reduced the sentence to two years, suspended for five years. However, on November 7, 2024, the Federal Court granted the prosecution's request and annulled the judgment, remanding the case for a new decision. On June 6, 2025, the Court of Appeal sentenced A.________ to 33 months in prison, 12 months unconditionally and 21 months conditionally. A.________ appealed against this judgment, requesting a reduction of the sentence to 24 months with full execution of the sentence or alternatively a reduction of the unconditionally served sentence to 3 to 6 months.
Summary of the Considerations
1. The appellant argues that his right to a hearing was violated, as the Court of Appeal rejected a requested postponement of the hearing on June 6, 2025. The Federal Court emphasizes that the appellant was willing to undergo an audiovisual interrogation, which did not violate the right to be heard 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 finds that the determination of sentences is at the discretion of the judge, but it must not fall outside the legal framework. In this case, it was found that the 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 inadmissible since the sentence exceeds two years. The sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal was deemed appropriate, and the reasons for a suspensive effect were insufficient.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The Federal Court rejected the appellant's appeal and confirmed the sentence of 33 months; 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 the Facts
The parties A.________ and B.________, employees of the ski company D.________ SA, were responsible for the proper functioning of a ski lift in compliance with legal safety requirements. On February 29, 2016, Belgian tourist C.________ was severely injured after colliding with a ski lift pole. The lower court convicted the appellants of negligent simple bodily injury under Article 125 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code. Both were sentenced to fines with a two-year probation period. The appellants contest this decision.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.2**: The principle *ne bis in idem* was not violated. There were new evidence and facts that justified the reopening of the previous dismissal order (Article 323 paragraph 1 CPP).
- **E.3**: Appellant B.________ was able to exercise his right to be heard but did not make any additional requests for evidence, which is why there is no violation of Article 6 paragraph 3 of the ECHR or Article 29 paragraph 2 of the Federal Constitution.
- **E.4**: The raised objections against the significance of the conducted expert opinions regarding the snow depth and the distance of the ski lift pole to the snow surface were deemed unfounded. The lower court could rely on the results of the expert opinions without arbitrariness.
- **E.5**: The lower court neither arbitrarily determined the facts nor violated the presumption of innocence. There was no uncertainty regarding the course of the accident and the relevant factors due to the circumstances.
- **E.6**: Negligence was affirmed for both appellants, as they violated their duties 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 relationship to the appellants' omissions.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
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 Article 74 AIG Against a Foreign National
Summary of the Facts
The Indian national A.________, against whom a final expulsion order exists, contested the restriction imposed 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 conditions (inclusion of the place of residence of his children). The restriction serves to ensure the enforcement 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 the 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. Following a renewed disciplinary procedure, CAS rejected the player's claims, citing the binding nature of its previous decision (res iudicata). In an appeal to the Federal Court, he asserted 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 the 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 protective measures for the marital community, alternating custody of the children was ordered in 2022, and maintenance contributions were set, which were adjusted multiple times by the lower courts. The dispute particularly revolved around 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 Appeal Due to Insufficient Justification
Summary of the Facts
The appellant was convicted by the District Court of Zurich on December 14, 2023, of mismanagement, failure to keep accounts, and multiple money laundering offenses, receiving a partially suspended prison sentence. The Court of Appeal of the Canton of Zurich changed this sentence to an unconditional prison sentence. The appellant filed an appeal against this decision to the Federal Court, particularly contesting 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: Modification of a Divorce Judgment Regarding Maintenance Payments
Summary of the Facts
The appeal to the Federal Court concerns the modification 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 modified are central to a conflict that has played out over several years before the lower courts. Central issues included the examination of new facts, the economic circumstances of the parties, and the educational status of the children. The lower court, the Vaud Cantonal Court (Cour d'appel civile), partially modified the divorce judgment and set new maintenance contributions.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_470/2025: Non-Entry on Appeals Regarding Protection Agreement and Building Permit
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court reviewed appeals 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 agreement for a protected maple tree 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 could only be considered as interim decisions and that neither of the decisions concluded the proceedings.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_911/2025: Judgment on the Decision of Non-Entry Regarding Recusal and Legal Aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ requested the lower court to accept his recusal request against the responsible public prosecutor and to grant him legal aid. The Federal Court examined the appeal against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne but did not enter into it, citing insufficient justification of the submission. The request for legal aid was denied due to lack of prospects of success.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_588/2025: Expulsion Detention – Assessment of the Appeal of A.________
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a Turkish national, applied for asylum in 2022, which was rejected in 2025. His appeal 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 office ordered expulsion detention, which was confirmed by the lower court. A.________ filed an appeal against this at the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_215/2025: Non-Entry on the Appeal
Summary of the 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 2,800 CHF (plus interest). A.________ appealed against points 2 and 3 of the dispositive part, which the Chambre des baux et loyers of the Cantonal Court of Geneva declared inadmissible on September 24, 2025. Thereafter, A.________ filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court on October 30, 2025, accompanied by a request for suspensive effect and legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_125/2025: Judgment on Claims Arising from a Work Contract
Summary of the 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 context of the renovation of the B.________ hall. The basis claimed is a work contract from June 25, 2018, the validity of which is disputed by the opposing party. The lower courts dismissed the claim, stating that 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 the Facts
The criminal proceedings are based on a large-scale surveillance operation against three main suspects for human trafficking and other offenses. Random finds emerged that implicated person A.________. The prosecution requested approval for the use of these findings in 2022. A.________ appealed against the approval, which was largely dismissed by the Court of Appeal of the Canton 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 the Facts
The A.________ AG (appellant) entered into a work contract with the municipality of U.________ (respondent) for the construction of a flood protection project, during which unexpected additional quantities and extra services arose due to unforeseen ground conditions. The final settlement was disputed through the cantonal procedure. The work contract provided for the application of the SIA standard 118. The appellant claimed a further residual 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 the Facts
The decision concerns a revision request against the judgment of the Federal Court (5A_503/2025) of September 10, 2025, which declared an appeal against a judgment of the lower court (decision of June 4, 2025, of the Cour des poursuites et faillites of the Cantonal Court of Vaud) inadmissible. The original judgment of the Federal Court declared the appeal inadmissible due to a late payment of the cost advance. The rejection of the legal aid was legally binding in the preceding procedure. A request for revision according to Articles 121 ff. BGG was submitted on October 6, 2025. The revision request was deemed unclear and unsubstantiated. In particular, it was considered inadmissible because it was submitted too late (Article 124 paragraph 1 lit. b BGG). The request for the rejection of Federal judges was deemed abusive according to the Federal Court and was therefore dismissed. The court costs of 800 francs were imposed on the applicant. Further processing of similar submissions from the applicant will be reserved.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_664/2025: Will and Inheritance Contract in Conflict
Summary of the Facts
The deceased E.A. had drawn up a will in which he disinherited his son A.A. and instead appointed his grandson I.A. as heir. However, this entry regulation conflicted with an earlier inheritance contract in which E.A. had stipulated that his three children should inherit equally. After E.A.'s death, the distribution of the estate and the question of the annulment of the will and disinheritance of A.A. became disputed. A.A. subsequently attempted to reintroduce certain estate values and allegedly unlawful distributions to other heirs into the estate.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_581/2025: Non-Entry on the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a Greek national, requested an extension of his EU/EFTA residence permit after it had been valid until February 11, 2024. The Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich rejected the extension on November 11, 2024, and ordered his expulsion. Two delivered letters were not picked up in time, and the deadline for submitting a legal remedy 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 an appeal 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 the Facts
The appellant A.________ is accused of severely injuring B.________ with a hammer on June 26, 2022, in Basel. The Court of Appeal of the Canton of Basel-Stadt classified this act as attempted murder but established his lack of culpability due to paranoid schizophrenia and ordered an inpatient therapeutic measure.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_658/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal Due to Lack of Cost Advance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant had appealed against a judgment of the Cour d'appel pénale des Tribunal cantonal des Kantons Vaud in a criminal case. The appeal was declared inadmissible due to 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 the Facts
The appellant, majority shareholder of a corporate group, conducted various accounts and deposits through a bank, including a rubric account, which allegedly was opened based on a presumably forged signature by a former customer advisor. Multiple 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 T&Cs, that the appellant is liable for any potential damage since there is no gross negligence on the part of the bank and the transactions are considered approved.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_518/2025: Withdrawal of the Appeal in a Civil Procedure Before the Federal Court
Summary of the Facts
The appellants A.________ and B.________ filed an appeal on October 15, 2025, against the judgment of the Civil Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Valais from 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 appeal had been withdrawn.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_897/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal and Dismissal of the Request for Legal Aid
Summary of the Facts
A.________ requested an adjustment of the protective measures in the marital law at the first instance court in Geneva, which reduced or lifted his maintenance obligations. After a request for legal aid was denied and a cost advance demand from the lower court was not met, 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 relates to the obligation to pay the cost advance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_712/2024: Dismissal of the Appeal Due to Non-Entry of the Criminal Investigation
Summary of the 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 from him, leading him to undertake financial obligations. On October 3, 2023, the Geneva Public Prosecutor's Office refused to take evidence and initiate a criminal investigation. The Chambre pénale de recours of the Canton of Geneva dismissed the appellant's appeal against the non-entry order of the Public Prosecutor's Office on May 24, 2024. The lower court found that there was insufficient evidence for the alleged fraud. The appellant appealed to the Federal Court and requested the annulment of the non-entry order and the remand 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 the Facts
A.________ was convicted by the Criminal Court of the Saanen district (FR) for rape, attempted sexual coercion, attempted coercion, and eavesdropping and recording conversations between other persons to a prison sentence of 36 months, of which 12 months are unconditional and 24 months conditional. The conditional sentence was tied to therapeutic 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 Denial of the Extension of a Residence Permit After the Dissolution of the Marital Community
Summary of the 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 took place on January 12, 2023. His request for an extension of the residence permit was denied because the necessary requirements according to Article 50 paragraph 1 lit. a AIG were not met.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_743/2024: Judgment Regarding Invalidity Insurance (Invalidity Pension)
Summary of the Facts
The appellant registered twice with the IV Office of the Canton of Aargau for benefit entitlement. After a work accident in 2016, which resulted in amputations of the right hand, an SMAB report was obtained. Based on this, the IV Office awarded a full invalidity pension for the period from July 1, 2017, to May 31, 2018. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed the appeal against this. The appellant requested before the Federal Court a permanent full pension or a remand for further clarification.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_428/2025: Judgment on Invalidity Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, worked part-time as a veterinary practice assistant. After being completely unable to work since February 2023, she registered with the IV Office Bern for benefit entitlement due to "burnout". By decision of November 21, 2024, the IV Office rejected the application, stating that no health impairment with invalidity effect in the legal sense was present. The Administrative Court of Bern confirmed the rejection on June 17, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.