Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the latest 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_458/2025: Serious Offense Against the Narcotics Act
Summary of Facts
The appellant, an Eritrean national, was convicted of serious offenses 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 and a ban from the country 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 claims that there was an arbitrary determination of 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 there was no arbitrariness. The classification of the appellant as an accomplice (and not merely as an accessory) was confirmed. - **E.2**: Regarding the assessment of the sentence, the Federal Court noted that the cantonal instances correctly assessed the severity of the offense, including the large amount 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 ban from the country for the appellant was deemed proportionate. Given the seriousness of the crime, no exceptional personal hardship was found that would justify a deviation 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 Swiss francs are imposed on the appellant.
6B_665/2025: Judgment of the Federal Court on the Proportionality of the Sanction
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 sentenced to three years in prison, of which two years were conditional. On December 20, 2023, the High Court of the Canton of Fribourg reduced the sentence to two years, conditional for five years. However, the Federal Court accepted the prosecution's appeal on November 7, 2024, overturned the judgment, and referred the case back for a new decision. On June 6, 2025, the High Court sentenced A.________ to 33 months in prison, 12 months unconditional and 21 months conditional. A.________ appeals this judgment and requests a reduction of the sentence to 24 months with full execution 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 because the High Court rejected a requested postponement of the hearing on June 6, 2025. The Federal Court emphasizes that the appellant was ready for an audiovisual hearing, thus the right of entry into the hearing was not violated. 2.1. The appellant contests the severity of the sentence, arguing that it does not correspond to the gravity of his behavior. The Federal Court states that the determination of sentences is at the discretion of the judge but must not exceed the legal framework. In this case, it was determined that the requested sentence of 24 months is clearly too low. 2.2. The appellant contests that he was not granted a complete suspension of the sentence, which is inadmissible as the sentence exceeds two years. The sentence imposed by the High Court was deemed appropriate, and the reasons for a suspensive effect are insufficient.
Summary of Disposition
The Federal Court dismissed 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 Concerning 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, the 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 pursuant to Art. 125 para. 1 StGB. Both were sentenced to fines, with a two-year probation period. The appellants are contesting this decision.
Summary of 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 (Art. 323 para. 1 CPP).
- **E.3**: The appellant B.________ was able to exercise his right to be heard but did not make any further requests for evidence, hence there is no violation of Art. 6 para. 3 of the ECHR or Art. 29 para. 2 BV.
- **E.4**: The objections raised against the value of the conducted expert opinions 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 expert opinions without arbitrariness.
- **E.5**: The lower court did not arbitrarily determine the facts nor violate 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 duty of care (e.g., checking the snow height and considering safety requirements). The lower court correctly found that the injuries of the victim were in a natural and adequate causal relationship with the omissions of the appellants.
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 an Exclusion Order Under Art. 74 AIG Against a Foreign National
Summary of Facts
The Indian national A.________, against whom a legally binding deportation decision exists, objected to the exclusion ordered by the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich to the district V.________ and its spatial adjustment by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich as disproportionate. The Federal Court confirmed the exclusion considering the extended framework conditions (inclusion of the place of residence of his children). The exclusion serves to ensure the enforcement of the deportation and is deemed proportionate by the Federal Court.
Full 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 against a Polish football club as the alleged legal successor of an insolvent club for outstanding payments. Earlier FIFA decisions and a procedure before the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS) did not yield favorable results for him. After a renewed disciplinary procedure, the TAS rejected the player's claims based on 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.
Full 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). They have been living separately since February 7, 2021. As part of protective measures for the marital community, alternating custody of the children was ordered in 2022, and maintenance contributions were established, which have been adjusted multiple times by the lower courts. The dispute particularly revolved around the amount of maintenance contributions in favor of the wife starting May 1, 2022.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_632/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal 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 records, and multiple money laundering, receiving a partially suspended prison sentence. The High Court of the Canton of Zurich changed this sentence to an unconditional prison sentence. The appellant filed an appeal to the Federal Court against this decision, particularly citing a violation of the right to be heard and the right to a fair trial.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_785/2024: Modification of a Divorce Judgment Regarding Maintenance Payments
Summary of Facts
The appeal before 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 at the center of 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 established new maintenance contributions.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_470/2025: Non-Acceptance of Appeals Concerning Protection Contract and Building Permit
Summary of Facts
The Federal Court examined 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 contract 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 procedures, it was decided that these can only be considered as interim decisions and neither decision concludes the proceedings.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_911/2025: Judgment on the Non-Acceptance Decision Regarding Recusal and Free Legal Aid
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.________ requested the lower court to oblige it to accept his recusal request against the responsible public prosecutor and to grant him free legal aid. The Federal Court reviewed the appeal against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne but did not accept it due to insufficient justification of the submission. The request for free legal aid was rejected due to lack of prospects for success.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_588/2025: Deportation Detention – Assessment of the Appeal of A.________
Summary of 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 deportation detention, which was confirmed by the lower court. A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Court against this.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_215/2025: Non-Acceptance of the Appeal
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 2,800 CHF (plus interest). A.________ appealed 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, A.________ filed a subsidiary constitutional appeal with the Federal Court on October 30, 2025, along with a request for suspensive effect and free legal aid.
Full 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 from the Canton of Basel-Stadt of CHF 259,798.65 or CHF 267,779.45 plus interest based on its services in the renovation of the B.________ hall. The basis it claims is a work contract dated June 25, 2018, the existence of which is disputed by the respondent. The lower courts dismissed the action as the existence of the work contract was not proven.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_813/2025: Judgment on the Approval of a Chance Discovery 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. During this, chance discoveries arose that implicated person A.________. The public prosecutor requested approval for the use of this information in 2022. A.________ appealed against the approval, which was largely dismissed by the High Court of the Canton of Bern.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_293/2025: Judgment Regarding Work Contract and Supplementary Claims
Summary of Facts
The A.________ AG (appellant) entered into a work contract with the municipality U.________ (respondent) for the construction of a flood protection project, which led to unexpected additional quantities and supplementary services due to unforeseen soil conditions. The final billing was disputed through the cantonal procedure. The work contract stipulated the application of the SIA standard 118. The appellant claimed a further remaining work wage; however, the lower courts only recognized a partial amount as owed.
Full 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 an appeal against a judgment of the lower court (decision of June 4, 2025, of the Cour des poursuites et faillites des Tribunal cantonal des Kantons 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 free legal aid was legally binding in the previous proceedings. A request for revision according to Art. 121 ff. 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 late (Art. 124 para. 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 Swiss francs were imposed on the applicant. Further processing of similar submissions by the applicant is reserved.
Full 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 appointed instead his grandson I.A. as heir. However, this entry rule contradicted an earlier inheritance contract in which E.A. had stipulated that his three children were to inherit equally. After E.A.'s death, the inheritance division and the question of the annulment of the will and the disinheritance of A.A. became contentious. A.A. subsequently attempted to reintroduce certain estate values and allegedly unlawful transfers to other heirs into the estate.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_581/2025: Non-Acceptance of the Appeal
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a Greek national, requested the 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 deportation. Two delivered letters were not collected in time, and the deadline for filing a legal remedy expired on December 20, 2024. A request for 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.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_358/2025: Judgment Regarding Attempted Murder and Order of a Stationary Therapeutic Measure
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.________ is accused of having severely injured B.________ with a hammer on June 26, 2022, in Basel. The Appellate Court of the Canton of Basel-Stadt qualified this act as attempted murder but found him to be insane due to paranoid schizophrenia and ordered a stationary therapeutic measure.
Full 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 Facts
The appellant appealed against a judgment of the Cour d'appel pénale des Tribunal cantonal des Kantons Vaud in a criminal matter. The appeal was declared inadmissible due to lack of timely payment of the cost advance.
Full 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, a majority shareholder of a corporate group, conducted various accounts and deposits through a bank, including a category account, which was allegedly opened due to a forged signature by a former client advisor. Through this account, multiple payments in the millions were made, 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 damage, as there was no gross negligence on the bank's part, and the transactions are deemed approved.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_518/2025: Withdrawal of Appeal in a Civil Procedure Before the Federal Court
Summary of 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 was an eviction and a revision. On November 3, 2025, the legal representative of the appellants informed the Federal Court that the appeal had been withdrawn.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_897/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal and Rejection of the Application for Free Legal Aid
Summary of Facts
A.________ requested an adjustment of the protective measures in the marital context at the first-instance court in Geneva, which reduced or revoked his maintenance obligations. After a rejected application for free legal aid and an unfulfilled cost advance demand from the lower court, A.________ repeatedly escalated the matters to 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.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_712/2024: Dismissal of the Appeal Due to Non-Initiation of Criminal Proceedings
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 from him, prompting him to undertake financial obligations. On October 3, 2023, the Geneva Public Prosecutor's Office rejected a taking of evidence and the initiation of criminal proceedings. The Chambre pénale de recours of the Canton of Geneva dismissed the appellant's appeal against the non-initiation decision of the Public Prosecutor's Office on May 24, 2024. The lower court found that there were insufficient suspicions for the alleged fraud. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Court and requested the annulment of the non-initiation decision and the referral back to the lower court or the Public Prosecutor's Office for the resumption of the criminal proceedings.
Full 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 District Court of the Saanen district (FR) for rape, attempted sexual coercion, attempted coercion, as well as for eavesdropping and recording conversations between other persons to a prison sentence of 36 months, of which 12 months are unconditional and 24 months are conditional. The conditional sentence was linked to psychotherapeutic care. The Cantonal Court of Fribourg confirmed this judgment in full. A.________ requested before the Federal Court the annulment of the convictions and the sentence.
Full 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 dissolved no later than October 7, 2022, and on January 12, 2023, the divorce was finalized by mutual consent. His application for an extension of the residence permit was rejected as the necessary conditions according to Art. 50 para. 1 lit. a AIG were not met.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_743/2024: Judgment Regarding Invalidity Insurance (Disability Pension)
Summary of Facts
The appellant registered twice with 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 report was obtained. Based on this, the IV office granted a full disability pension for a limited 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 referral for further clarification.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_428/2025: Judgment Regarding Invalidity 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 to the IV office in Bern for benefits due to "burnout." By decision of November 21, 2024, the IV office rejected the application, stating that there was no health impairment with invalidating effect in legal terms. The Administrative Court of Bern confirmed the rejection on June 17, 2025.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.