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 present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and decisions. 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_738/2025: Imputation of the Duration of Deprivation of Liberty on Imprisonment
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a youth born in 2006, was repeatedly convicted of criminal offenses. Most recently, on January 31, 2025, he was sentenced by the Youth Court of the Canton of Vaud to a prison term of 210 days for extortion through robbery. The prison sentence was fully offset by the deprivation of liberty previously served in France during the extradition proceedings. A.________ requested that the duration of his previous placement in a closed facility also be credited to this sentence. The Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Appeal of Vaud rejected his appeal on July 28, 2025.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1**: New evidence submitted by the appellant in the appeal proceedings before the Federal Court is inadmissible according to Art. 99(1) BGG.
**E.2**: The appellant asserted a violation of Art. 32 DPMin and Art. 51 StGB as well as an arbitrary finding of facts.
- **E.2.1**: Art. 32 DPMin regulates the offsetting of the duration of a placement stay against a prison sentence when the placement is revoked. Such offsetting is only considered when the sentence and placement are ordered simultaneously.
- **E.2.2**: The cantonal courts found that the prison sentence of 210 days was not imposed simultaneously with the placement, which is why Art. 32(3) DPMin is not applicable. Instead, the sentence was fully offset against the extradition detention in France according to Art. 51 StGB.
- **E.2.3**: The appellant argued that the judgment of July 11, 2023, which imposed a prison sentence of 240 days along with the placement, was in competition with the prison sentence imposed in the current proceedings. This argument was dismissed as the jurisdiction to determine such a connection lies with the youth courts.
**E.2.4**: Regarding the alleged exclusive connection of the extradition detention with a separate criminal investigation in the Canton of Valais, it was found that the detention resulted simultaneously from two separate proceedings.
**E.3**: The appellant's complaint was unfounded and was dismissed. Legal aid was denied as the appeal had no prospects of success.
Summary of the Decision
The appeal was dismissed and the requested free legal aid was denied. Court costs were imposed on the appellant.
5A_661/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of an Appeal Regarding Child Support Measures
Summary of the Facts
A.________ and B.________, divorced since 2022, dispute adjustments to the divorce judgment regarding support contributions for their two children. B.________ requested measures including an increase in support contributions. The cantonal court partially amended these measures. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The challenged decision is a precautionary measure within the framework of an adjustment of the divorce judgment. It is an interim decision within the meaning of Art. 93 LTF and is only contestable if it causes an irreparable disadvantage. The alleged disadvantage (financial damage) is not recognized as legally irreparable. A.________ could not demonstrate the prerequisites for an irreparable disadvantage. The appeal concerns only the support contributions; questions regarding the custody of the children and visitation rights have already been regulated in previous decisions and are not considered here. Since the financial circumstances of the parties do not suggest any irreparable legal disadvantages, the appeal is inadmissible.
Summary of the Decision
The appeal is declared inadmissible, A.________ bears the court costs and must pay B.________ a party compensation.
2C_643/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of an Appeal Related to Financial Hurdles in the Training of Apprentices
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court had to decide on an appeal by A.________ against the decision of the single judge of the Cantonal Court of Vaud (decision of October 6, 2025). The previous decision declared A.________'s appeal inadmissible due to untimely payment of costs related to the rejection of an authorization for apprentice training. The appeal before the Federal Court aimed at a revision of the decision or a significant reduction of the required advances.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines its jurisdiction ex officio and checks the admissibility of appeals freely. The public appeal concerning vocational training is generally subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Court (Art. 82 lit. a, Art. 86(1) lit. d LTF). The incorrect designation of the submission ("opposition") does not affect its admissibility, as long as the formal requirements of the intended legal remedies are met. The challenged cantonal decision is based essentially on cantonal law. However, the appellant should have asserted a violation of federal law or constitutional rights, for which a detailed and substantiated justification should have been provided. These requirements were not met (Art. 106(2) LTF). In summary, the submission does not meet the legally required criteria for a legally sufficient justification. Therefore, the submission is obviously inadmissible and will be treated according to the simplified procedure under Art. 108 LTF.
Summary of the Decision
The appeal is declared inadmissible, the court costs are imposed on the appellant, and no party compensation is awarded.
5A_686/2025: Decision Regarding Free Legal Aid and Advance Costs in a Main Intervention Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The appellant had filed requests as the main intervener in a burden adjustment procedure between his wife and a bank and subsequently requested free legal aid several times or attempted to suspend the case until the completion of a criminal proceeding. The District Court repeatedly set deadlines for him to provide the court cost advance. Both the Cantonal Court and the Federal Court rejected the respective appeals of the appellant, and some legal remedies were not considered due to insufficient justification.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_986/2025: Decision on the Appointment of a Parenting Capacity Assessment
Summary of the Facts
The Child and Adult Protection Authority (KESB) Emmental opened a child protection procedure regarding the appellant's son and ordered a parenting capacity assessment after obtaining a clarification report. The Cantonal Court of Bern did not consider the appeal lodged against it, as an irreparable disadvantage was not substantiated. The appellant then appealed to the Federal Court, particularly citing procedural errors and violations of human rights.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_979/2025: Approval of a Seizure in the Criminal Proceedings Against A.________
Summary of the Facts
The criminal proceedings against A.________ concerned the approval for the use of a seizure obtained from the surveillance of another accused (B.________), granted by the coercive measures court of the Canton of Basel-Landschaft. A.________ filed several appeals against the original approval decision and subsequent surveillance measures as well as decisions of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Basel-Landschaft, which were largely dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft. A.________ requested the Federal Court to annul these decisions.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_505/2025: Decision on the Custody of an Out-of-Wedlock Child
Summary of the Facts
A.________ (father) and B.________ (mother) are the unwed parents of child C.________, born in 2023. A.________ has sole custody of two older children from a previous relationship, D.________ (2016) and E.________ (2019). The parents separated in August 2024. After the separation, the mother requested super-provisional and precautionary measures in November 2024 to obtain the right to determine the child's place of residence and actual custody over C.________. The father, on the other hand, requested alternating custody and the establishment of C.________'s residence at his home. With a partial ruling on February 3, 2025, the District Court granted custody to the mother and determined the child's residence with her. At the same time, the father was granted extensive visitation rights. This was specified by a corrective decision on February 5, 2025. On the appeals of both parents, the cantonal appellate authority decided on May 14, 2025, to continue assigning custody to the mother, while the father's visitation arrangement was adjusted again.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_710/2025: Judgment on the Admissibility of an Appeal in a Burden Adjustment Procedure
Summary of the Facts
A.________ wanted to file an application as the main intervener in a burden adjustment procedure before the District Court of Uster. Several procedural steps, particularly decisions regarding cost advances and rejections of requests for free legal aid, led to an appeal by B.________ (wife of A.________) to the Cantonal Court of Zurich. The Cantonal Court did not consider the appeal due to a lack of standing and imposed court costs. Against the cantonal ruling, B.________ appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_507/2025: Order in the Social Assistance Procedure (Withdrawal of the Appeal)
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ withdrew her appeal against the judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich of August 29, 2025, regarding social assistance in a letter dated November 14, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1180/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal Against Pre-Trial Detention
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a Swiss-Kosovar dual citizen, was arrested by the police on February 28, 2025. He is accused, among other things, of carrying a loaded firearm and a knuckle duster in public, illegally storing weapons and accessories, and being involved in drug trafficking. After several extensions of pre-trial detention, the appellant requested his release on August 21, 2025, at least under conditions. The request was denied due to flight, collusion, and recidivism risks. The appellant challenged this with an appeal to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_460/2025: Order Regarding the Withdrawal of an Appeal in a Corporate Law Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The appellant appealed against a ruling of the Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich, which dealt with corporate law issues under Art. 105 FusG (compensatory action). During the course of the proceedings, she requested, among other things, suspensive effect. After various ancillary orders, however, the appellant declared the withdrawal of the appeal in a letter dated November 18, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1156/2025: Decision on the Executability of a Deportation Order
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced to deportation from Switzerland and was to leave the country by August 25, 2025. He requested a suspension of the deportation deadline and argued that the deportation judgment was not final, as there were still proceedings pending (appeal to the Federal Court and a revision). The request was denied by the competent cantonal authority and later by the cantonal administrative court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_783/2025: Denial of Free Legal Aid in the Appeal Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.________ applied for free legal aid in connection with an appeal against the decision on child support, custody, and parental decision-making authority. Due to the financial situation and the calculation of available resources, the cantonal court did not recognize the need. The Federal Court conducted a detailed examination of the calculation of A.________'s income and asset situation and also concluded that she had financial means available to cover the procedural costs. Furthermore, it was determined that the request could not be retroactively justified sufficiently.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_718/2025: Decision on the Subject Matter of "Legal Remedy: Right of Visit (Advance Costs)"
Summary of the Facts
A.________ lodged an appeal against a decision by the cantonal "Chambre des curatelles" of the Canton of Vaud from August 22, 2025, which included a demand for an advance payment of 600 CHF as well as an order for provisional visitation arrangements for child C.________. In addition, the appellant requested free legal aid. The cantonal authority rejected both the appeal and the request for free legal aid on November 13, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6F_35/2025: Request for Revision Against a Judgment of the Swiss Federal Court
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ requested a revision of the Federal Court's ruling of September 11, 2025 (6B_549/2025), in which a constitutional complaint against the non-consideration of his request for revision by the Cantonal Court of Zurich (ruling of June 4, 2025) was dismissed as obviously unfounded. The contested decision dealt with a false entry in the criminal record, which the cantonal courts did not use as a basis. The applicant also argued that the non-examination of the criminal record entry constituted a violation of Art. 121 lit. c BGG, Art. 29 BV, and Art. 6 ECHR.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_591/2025: Social Assistance (Process Prerequisite) – Non-consideration of Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, is contesting a ruling by the municipal council of Dottikon, which ceased the provision of material social assistance and switched to emergency aid. The background of this decision is repeated and serious violations by the appellant against conditions, particularly in connection with participation in support programs and job-seeking efforts.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_874/2025: Non-consideration of Appeal Regarding House Search and Search
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Court against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Zurich from August 21, 2025, regarding a house search and search. The Federal Court set a deadline for the appellant to pay a cost advance, which he did not fulfill either within the original deadline or within the extension.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9F_21/2025: Revision of a Previous Judgment Regarding Insurance Against Old Age and Survivors (AHV)
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was held responsible by the Caisse interprofessionnelle AVS of the Federation of Romande Enterprises (FER CIAB 106.5) according to Art. 52 LAVS for a damage of CHF 166,337.20 due to non-payment of social insurance contributions. The cantonal court confirmed this decision on May 13, 2025. The appeal lodged thereafter with the Federal Court was declared inadmissible due to late and incomplete payment of the ordered advance payment by a judgment of August 26, 2025. In his submission of September 9, 2025, A.________ requested the revision of this judgment and provided substantial arguments against its formal rigor.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_487/2025: Judgment on Protective Measures in the Marital Community and Support Contribution
Summary of the Facts
A.________ (born 1944) and B.________ (born 1957) have been married since 2002, without children together. In March 2024, the wife filed a request for protective measures for the marital community. The first instance ordered, among other things, a separation of the spouses, a support payment from the husband to the wife, and an allocation of housing. The husband's appeal was dismissed by the previous instance. In June 2025, the husband filed an appeal with the Federal Court, requesting a reform or annulment of the previous instance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_962/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an appeal with the Cantonal Court of Zurich against a dismissal order of the Youth Prosecutor's Office Unterland from July 3, 2025. The Cantonal Court did not consider the appeal on August 21, 2025. The appellant appealed this decision of the Cantonal Court in criminal matters to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_706/2024: Injuries from Serious Bodily Injury by Negligence; Arbitrary.
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court had to decide on two appeals (6B_706/2024 and 6B_743/2024) against a ruling of the Cour d'appel pénale of the Cantonal Tribunal of Vaud. The subject was the conviction of two individuals for serious bodily injury through negligence. The accident occurred in 2015 when a heavy construction vehicle (Manitou) moved due to inadequate securing and pinned a worker against a wall, causing him serious injuries. The cantonal instance found a breach of duty of care by both the worker (A.________) and his employer (B.________) and convicted both.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_410/2024: Judgment on Benefit Eligibility from Occupational Pension Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, was professionally insured with AXA when she first suffered a complete inability to work in 2010. The occupational pension initially provided pension payments until January 2013. She then achieved 100% earning capacity in adapted activities. In 2020, she was again granted a pension from the insurance, associated with a renewed complete inability to work. She demanded that AXA again provide benefits from February 2013, which was denied.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_391/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of an Appeal in the Area of Daily Allowance
Summary of the Facts
The Insurance Court of the Canton of Ticino ordered C.________ SA by judgment of June 16, 2025, to pay CHF 30,468.55 to the plaintiff B.________ in connection with daily allowance. A.________ SA lodged an appeal in civil matters with the Federal Court on August 20, 2025, to annul the judgment. Questions arose regarding legal representation and the standing of the appeal, as A.________ SA was not involved in the cantonal proceedings.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_598/2025: Judgment Regarding Social Assistance (Process Prerequisite)
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ contested the judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich from September 4, 2025, regarding social assistance. The dispute focused on process prerequisites, particularly the requirements for the justification of an appeal according to Art. 42(1) and (2) BGG.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1103/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of an Appeal in the Area of Conditional Release
Summary of the Facts
A conditional release of the appellant A.________ was ordered by the Tribunal d'application des peines et des mesures genevois (TAPEM) and conditioned. The Chambre pénale de recours of the Canton of Geneva overturned this order and referred the matter back to TAPEM for re-examination. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_990/2025: Decision Regarding Precautionary Measures in Divorce Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The appellant and the respondent, divorced parents of a minor child, dispute precautionary measures regarding child support payments. The District Court of Weinfelden regulated custody and support payments in the context of summary proceedings. A later super-provisional request from the appellant regarding the offsetting of support payments was dismissed, and the appeal lodged against this decision with the Cantonal Court of Thurgau was unsuccessful. The appellant then filed an appeal in civil matters with the Federal Court and requested free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_655/2025: Non-consideration of Appeal Regarding Suspension in Unemployment Insurance Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The appellant contested the ruling of the Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich from October 2, 2025, which rejected his request for suspension of the appeal proceedings. This procedure concerned an objection decision by the Syna Unemployment Fund from June 11, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_34/2025: Judgment Regarding Suspension of Benefits by an Accident Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ had two accident events, during which he suffered right foot complaints. The SWICA accident insurance initially provided medical costs and daily allowances for these complaints but later suspended the benefits due to a lack of natural causality, which was supported by a medical expert. Both the objection and the appeal to the cantonal court were unsuccessful, and finally, the Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed a further appeal against the suspension of benefits.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_134/2025: Decision Regarding the Non-renewal of Residence Permits
Summary of the Facts
The Sri Lankan citizen A.________ initially received provisional admission and later a residence permit after entering Switzerland as an asylum seeker in 1992, which was extended multiple times until 2018. His application for a settlement permit was rejected in 2014 due to his indebtedness. His wife B.________, an Indian citizen, joined him in 2006 as part of family reunification and also received a residence permit. Due to social assistance-related dependency and substantial debts, the cantonal authorities refused to renew the residence permits of the spouses, which was confirmed by the previous instance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_566/2025: Judgment Regarding Offenses Against the Narcotics Act and Sentencing
Summary of the Facts
The appellant was convicted for his involvement in a planned illegal indoor cannabis facility, which was intended to produce and sell THC-containing marijuana. He financed the project and provided replacement mobile phones and SIM cards. The revocation of a conditional sentence for two previous convictions was also ordered. The first-instance judgment of the Regional Court of Prättigau/Davos was confirmed by the Cantonal Court of Graubünden.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.