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 dispositives. For the other rulings, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all rulings are available on the portal of Lexplorer. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest rulings tailored to your areas of law.
2C_659/2025: Ruling on the Admission of an Appeal Related to Mutual Legal Assistance in Tax Matters
Summary of the Facts
The ruling concerns a request for mutual legal assistance from the tax authority of Ukraine dated May 28, 2021, to the Federal Tax Administration (ESTV) based on the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (MAC). The subject of the request is a tax audit of two Ukrainian companies that allegedly imported natural gas through a Swiss company (A.________ Ltd), with violations of the "at arm's length" principle suspected. The ESTV decided to transmit information that the appellant disputed, particularly regarding certain balance sheets and annual accounts as well as names of third parties. The appellant challenged this decision before the Federal Administrative Court, which dismissed the appeal. Before the Federal Court, she argued, among other things, that legal questions of fundamental importance were at stake and that the lawful implementation of mutual assistance was in doubt.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines its jurisdiction and concludes that the appeal in public law matters is only admissible under certain conditions according to Art. 84a BGG, particularly in cases of legal questions of fundamental importance or particularly significant cases. The legal questions raised by the appellant do not meet these criteria. Regarding the formal structure of the final decision by the ESTV, it is stated that the question under Art. 17 para. 1 StAhiG can be answered based on general procedural guarantees, and no legal question of fundamental relevance arises from it. The final decision is sufficiently reasoned, and the appellant was able to inspect all relevant documents. The question of the expected significance of the transmission of information is answered according to established case law. A plausibility check by the ESTV suffices, and the presumption expressed by the requesting authority was deemed plausible. There is no new legal question. The transmission of names of third parties in the annual accounts is examined according to the criteria of Art. 4 para. 3 StAhiG. The lower court acted in accordance with case law by weighing the interest in mutual assistance against the proportionality of disclosing third-party information. The court concludes that none of the questions raised are of fundamental importance and that the request for mutual assistance was correctly assessed. It does not proceed with the appeal.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Court does not proceed with the appeal, imposes court costs of CHF 5,000 on the appellant, and does not award any party compensation.
2C_681/2025: Decision on Residence Permit after Divorce
Summary of the Facts
The Moroccan national A.________ received a residence permit after marrying a Swiss citizen, which was valid until August 21, 2025. The marriage was dissolved in January 2025. The Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich revoked the permit and ordered A.________ to leave Switzerland. He unsuccessfully appealed this decision to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich. On November 24, 2025, A.________ filed an appeal in public law matters with the Federal Court to overturn the revocation and extend the residence permit.
Summary of the Considerations
E.1: The admissibility of the appeal in public law matters requires a potential entitlement to a permit. The expired residence permit has no legal effect, and A.________ has no right to its extension. E.2: The requirements of Art. 42 and Art. 50 para. 1 lit. a and b AIG are not met. The appellant's arguments regarding professional and social integration do not constitute a post-marital hardship case. E.2.6: A claim under Art. 8 para. 1 ECHR (private and family life) is excluded, as neither the duration of residence nor the integration establishes a particularly intense relationship with Switzerland, and the appellant does not show a core family. E.3: The subsidiary constitutional complaint is inadmissible, as no violation of party rights has been asserted that could represent a formal denial of justice. E.4: The appeal is inadmissible, which is why the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 BGG is applied.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal is dismissed, and the court costs are imposed on the appellant, without any party compensation.
7B_1053/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal Against the Creation of a DNA Profile
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office Zurich-Sihl is conducting criminal proceedings against A.________, among other things, for rape. By order of May 21, 2025, it ordered the creation of a DNA profile based on an already existing buccal swab from A.________ and the extension of the deletion period. A.________ appealed against this, which was dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Zurich on September 3, 2025. A.________ then requested the Federal Court to overturn the decision of the Cantonal Court and to prohibit the creation or deletion of any DNA profile.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The Federal Court states that the ordered coercive measure is an interim decision within the meaning of Art. 93 BGG. The appeal is only admissible if an irremediable disadvantage arises or if a final decision can be brought about immediately that would save significant expenditure. The appellant could not demonstrate this, and it was also not apparent to the court. Therefore, the appeal against this interim decision is inadmissible. - **E.2:** Consequently, the appeal is not proceeded with, and the court costs are to be imposed on the appellant (Art. 66 para. 1 BGG).
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Court did not proceed with the appeal and imposed the court costs on the appellant. The judgment will be sent to the parties and the lower court.
4A_150/2025: Decision Regarding Rent Adjustment in Geneva
Summary of the Facts
The city of Geneva as the landlord and the appellants as tenants of a five-room apartment entered into a lease agreement, originally for five years, which was later tacitly extended annually. The contract is subject to a municipal regulation regarding the rental of social housing, whereby the rent is calculated based on family income and occupancy of the apartment. On December 21, 2021, the landlord increased the annual rent from CHF 15,540 to CHF 24,900 (excluding ancillary costs), based on the usual rents in the region or the municipal regulation. The appellants contested the increase, leading to proceedings that ultimately reached the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_423/2025: Dismissal of the Appeal Against Seizure of Assets
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns the legal dispute over assets that were secured at a company (B.________ Ltd) through a seizure ordered under Art. 271 para. 1 lit. 4 SchKG. Specifically, it concerns the question of whether assets of the legally independent but economically connected A.________ SA can be regarded as belonging to the assets of B.________ Ltd. The lower court relied on the piercing-the-corporate-veil principle, asserting an economic unit between the companies and an abuse of legal independence.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_847/2025: Requirements for the Valid Signing of an Objection in Criminal Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an objection against a criminal order for hindering an official act and disobedience of the debtor in enforcement and bankruptcy proceedings. However, the objection did not meet the formal requirements according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, as it lacked the personal signature. Both the presiding judge of the district court and the lower courts in the canton did not proceed with the submission. The appeal to the Federal Court similarly did not meet the reasoning requirements.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4D_201/2025: Dismissal Due to Withdrawal of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal on October 14, 2025, against a decision of the Civil Chamber of the Geneva Cantonal Court dated October 13, 2025. By presidential order on October 16, 2025, she was required to pay a cost advance of CHF 500 by October 31, 2025. On October 30, 2025, the appellant withdrew her appeal.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_1294/2023: Judgment on Intentional Homicide, Robbery, and Sentencing
Summary of the Facts
The Olten-Gösgen District Court convicted the appellant A.________ on November 29, 2022, of intentional homicide, robbery, misleading the judiciary, and violations of the Weapons Act, sentencing him to ten years of imprisonment and a conditionally enforceable monetary penalty. The acquittal regarding theft and offenses against the Narcotics Act remained. The Cantonal Court of Solothurn confirmed these judgments and convictions on September 26, 2023. The appellant filed an appeal in criminal matters with the Federal Court, primarily seeking an acquittal and a new sentencing.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_178/2025: Judgment on International and Local Jurisdiction in Disputes from Sales Contracts
Summary of the Facts
The B.________ AG claims from A.________ a payment of EUR 104,408.90 plus interest from a sales contract for chemicals. A.________ disputes the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court of Zurich and requests its dismissal as well as the cancellation of the lawsuit. The Commercial Court of Zurich rejected the objection of A.________ regarding jurisdiction and confirmed its jurisdiction.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_13/2025: Assignment of Claims; Active Legitimacy
Summary of the Facts
A.________, formerly the owner of a sole proprietorship in the construction sector, performed construction work for the villa of spouses B.B.________ and C.B.________. In February 2010, A.________ assigned all his claims, including those against the spouses B.________, to Bank D.________ in a comprehensive assignment of claims. Subsequently, there was a legal dispute regarding the registration of a definitive construction contractor's lien, in which the active legitimacy of A.________ was questioned due to the assignment of claims.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4F_36/2025: Inadmissibility of the Request for Revision
Summary of the Facts
The applicant submitted a request for revision against the judgment 4D_110/2025, in which the Federal Court had not proceeded with an appeal due to the lack of payment of the cost advance. The request for revision aimed to review and reassess the originally rendered judgment. In addition, the applicant requested the granting of legal aid for the revision procedure.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_695/2025: Judgment on the Appeal Against Conviction for Murder
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.A.________, is accused of intentionally and particularly ruthlessly killing his former daughter-in-law during a confrontation in her apartment in Switzerland on February 16, 2021, by firing six shots from a prohibited weapon. The lower court, the Cantonal Court of Zurich, found him guilty of murder, fraud, and multiple violations of the Weapons Act and sentenced him to 19 years of imprisonment, imposed a ban on him for 15 years, and decided on claims for damages and satisfaction. Before the Federal Court, the appellant requested an acquittal of the murder charge and a reduction of the sanctions.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_534/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ was ordered by the decision of the single judge of the Cantonal Chamber of Vaud (decision of October 10, 2025) to provide a security of CHF 30,000 within 30 days, otherwise his lawsuit against B.________ S.A. would be dismissed. A.________ appealed directly to the Federal Court against this decision, although there was the possibility of a cantonal appeal.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_389/2025: Decision on the Question of Violation of the Right to be Heard in the Dismissal of a Request for the Repeal of a Guardianship
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a man born in 1998, is subject to a guardianship measure for representation and management, which includes, among other things, the management of his income, housing matters, and therapeutic care. He was also deprived of the exercise of his civil rights in certain areas. After A.________ reported an improvement in his situation, he requested the repeal of the measure, which was dismissed at first instance and cantonally. The Federal Court annulled the cantonal decision in 2024 due to a violation of the right to be heard and returned the matter for reconsideration to the lower court. The lower court subsequently confirmed the guardianship measure in its decision of March 31, 2025.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_1041/2025: Judgment on Non-Admission of an Appeal Regarding Unsealing
Summary of the Facts
The appeal was directed against an order of the District Court of Zurich, Coercive Measures Court, dated September 1, 2025, regarding unsealing. The legal representative of the appellant did not submit a legally sufficient power of attorney for the proceedings before the Federal Court, although several extensions of time were granted to him.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_392/2025: Non-Admission of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal on September 11, 2025, against a decision of the Civil Appeal Court of the Cantonal Tribunal of Vaud dated May 15, 2025, in a tenancy matter (lease agreement). By letter dated October 20, 2025, the appellant declared through his legal representative the withdrawal of the appeal.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
2C_651/2025: Judgment on the Request for Legal Aid in the Context of a Supervision Procedure in the Legal Profession
Summary of the Facts
The appellant (A.________) had submitted a supervision notice against the respondent (lawyer B.________) to the cantonal supervisory authority for the legal profession, which received no response. He then filed an administrative court appeal with the Cantonal Court of Schaffhausen and requested legal aid. This was denied, and a cost advance was requested, whereupon A.________ appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_969/2025: Non-Admission of Appeal and Recusal Request
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was prosecuted by a penal order of the Public Prosecutor's Office Muri-Bremgarten for threats and repeated assaults. Following his objection, the President of the District Court Muri decided on June 17, 2025, to terminate the proceedings. Against this order, A.________ appealed and submitted a recusal request, to which the Cantonal Court of Aargau decided on August 15, 2025, not to admit both requests. A.________ then filed a criminal appeal to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_605/2025: Judgment on Fraud, Attempted Fraud, and Multiple Forgery
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is accused of making false statements about pain to doctors in order to obtain incorrect incapacity certificates. He used these to wrongfully receive daily allowances from Suva amounting to at least CHF 47,576. Furthermore, he is alleged to have attempted to obtain an unlawful disability pension from the IV Office of the Canton of Graubünden through false statements. The damage until the next pension review could amount to CHF 75,948, and until retirement age to CHF 315,215. Conviction by the Regional Court of Plessur to a conditional prison sentence of 12 months for fraud, attempted fraud, and multiple forgery. Order of expulsion for 5 years. The civil claim of the SVA Graubünden was referred to civil court. The Cantonal Court of Graubünden fully confirmed the first-instance judgment.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_818/2025: Non-Admission of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a criminal appeal against a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Aargau dated August 13, 2025. The subjects were negligent simple bodily injury, violations of the Dog Law, as well as the alleged violation of arbitrariness and the right to be heard. The cost advance that the appellant was required to pay was not settled despite several requests and deadline extensions.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_809/2025: Judgment on Non-Admission of Appeals Against Non-Commencement Orders
Summary of the Facts
A.________ and B.________ filed several criminal complaints against members of the municipal council of Zizers, the building office manager C.________, and a lawyer for various offenses (including abuse of office and fraudulent damage). These complaints concern different disputes related to building application procedures. The Public Prosecutor's Office of Graubünden did not take these proceedings into hand. The Cantonal Court of Graubünden dismissed the appeals and a recusal request, as far as it proceeded.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
2C_265/2025: Judgment Regarding the Extension of the Residence Permit
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, a citizen of the Dominican Republic, entered Switzerland after remarrying the Swiss citizen B.________ in 2021. The marriage was subsequently dissolved in 2023. The appellant requested an extension of his residence permit, which was denied by the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich due to non-fulfillment of the conditions under Art. 50 para. 1 lit. a AIG. Both the Security Directorate and the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the appeals filed against this decision.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_495/2025: Judgment Regarding Legal Enforcement
Summary of the Facts
The Regional Court of Landquart granted the respondent a definitive legal enforcement against the appellant for an amount of CHF 11,200 plus interest. The appellant appealed this decision to the Cantonal Court of Graubünden, which denied the requests for suspensive effect, legal aid, and a process cost advance. The appellant then appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4D_188/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal and Definitive Legal Enforcement
Summary of the Facts
A.________ (appellant) filed an objection against a payment order from the Canton of Vaud. By decision of January 17, 2025, the justice of the peace of the district of Lausanne ordered the definitive legal enforcement. An appeal against this decision was declared inadmissible by the Court of Enforcement and Bankruptcy of the Cantonal Courts of Vaud on August 20, 2025, due to insufficient reasoning. On September 28, 2025, the appellant filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_1198/2025: Non-Admission Due to Late Submission
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, filed three identical appeals with the Cantonal Court of Zurich against the non-commencement order of the Public Prosecutor's Office III of the Canton of Zurich. The Cantonal Court ordered him by decision of September 19, 2025, to pay a process deposit, threatening non-admission if this requirement was not met. Against this procedure, A.________ filed an appeal to the Federal Court on November 5, 2025.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6F_21/2025: Nullification of a Criminal Judgment Due to Alleged Defense Deficiencies
Summary of the Facts
A.________ submitted a request for revision to the Federal Court to declare the judgments of the Federal Court (May 15, 2023) and the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen (July 13, 2020) absolutely null due to an alleged conflict of interest of his official defense attorney. He argued that this conflict of interest resulted in a lack of necessary defense. In addition to the nullification, he requested release from custody and legal aid.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_588/2025: Judgment Regarding Protocol Requirements and Repetition of an Appeal Hearing
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was convicted by the single judge in criminal matters of the Canton of Basel-Stadt for defamation and appealed. After an appeal hearing, the audio track of the audio protocol was missing. A written protocol was created, the correction of which A.________ requested and later demanded the repetition of the appeal hearing. The appellate court rejected the request for the repetition of the hearing and partially approved some protocol amendments. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court to enforce the repetition of the hearing or to approve all amendment requests.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_904/2025: Non-Admission of a Submission Regarding an Objection Against a Criminal Order
Summary of the Facts
The appellant approached the Federal Court and requested the review of a criminal order from the Public Prosecutor's Office of Kreuzlingen, referring particularly to her financial hardship and the co-responsibility of her husband. However, the criminal order was not final, as an objection should have been filed with the competent Public Prosecutor's Office.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
9C_589/2024: Judgment Regarding Professional Pension (Pillar 3a)
Summary of the Facts
A.________, who took out two life insurance policies with AXA Vie SA under the Professional Pension (Pillar 3a), is confronted with the termination of these policies by AXA Vie due to alleged false statements about his health condition. The cantonal lower court declared AXA Vie's cancellations of the insurance contracts invalid, but rejected A.________'s request for exemption from premium payment obligations. Both A.________ and AXA Vie filed appeals with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_118/2024: Judgment on the Admissibility of Evidence in a Criminal Context Related to the Covid-19 Ordinance Special Situation
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, was accused of violating measures to contain the Covid-19 pandemic and the hospitality law of the Canton of Thurgau on September 14 and 17, 2021, by hindering operational checks by the authorities and omitting certificate checks. The District Court of Frauenfeld and the Cantonal Court of Thurgau found him guilty and imposed a conditional fine and a penalty.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.