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 with facts, considerations, and dispositive elements. For the other rulings, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all rulings are available on the Lexplorer portal. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest rulings tailored to your areas of law.
1C_662/2025: Non-admission of a complaint in public law matters
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint on August 14, 2025, with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich against a decision of the cantonal Department of Security regarding a fee imposition. The Administrative Court set a deadline for the payment of a cost advance, which went unused. Subsequently, the Administrative Court decided not to admit the complaint by order dated September 30, 2025. A.________ appealed this decision to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
- E.1: The Administrative Court correctly pointed out to A.________ the obligation to make a cost advance and made the non-admission in case of a non-advanced payment as threatened.
- E.2: The Federal Court examined whether the complaint met the substantiation requirements of Art. 42 para. 2 BGG. It found that there had been no sufficient engagement with the considerations of the contested decision.
- E.3: Due to the obvious inadequacy of the complaint, the Federal Court did not proceed with it in the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 BGG.
- E.4: The court costs were imposed on the complainant, and no party compensation was awarded (Art. 66 para. 1 and Art. 68 BGG).
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Court did not admit the complaint and imposed the court costs on the complainant. The judgment was communicated to the parties in writing.
8C_616/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint in the area of supplementary benefits to AHV/IV
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ approached the Federal Court requesting full or partial debt relief or, alternatively, a payment relief. The Federal Court instructed the complainant to submit the contested decision within the set deadline (Art. 42 para. 5 BGG), which did not happen.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** Submission of the complaint without attachment of the contested decision. - **E.2:** Setting a deadline for remedying the defect with reference to the consequences of non-remedy (Art. 42 para. 5 BGG). - **E.3:** Application of Art. 108 para. 1 BGG for the immediate dismissal of obviously inadmissible complaints in a simplified procedure by the individual judge. - **E.4:** The missing attachment of the contested decision leads to the inadmissibility of the complaint according to Art. 42 para. 3 and 5 BGG. - **E.5:** Exceptionally, no court costs are raised according to Art. 66 para. 1 sentence 2 BGG.
Summary of the Dispositive
The court found that the complaint is inadmissible and does not impose any court costs.
1C_634/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint regarding building permit and standing to appeal
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint against a decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Thurgau dated September 17, 2025. In this decision, the Administrative Court did not admit a complaint from A.________ because he had not timely paid the required cost advance. The underlying dispute concerned the granting of a building permit for three multi-family houses in Arbon to B.________ AG and the rejection of the objection by A.________.
Summary of the Considerations
The Administrative Court of Thurgau did not admit the complaint of A.________ because the cost advance was not paid. A.________ submitted a so-called "analogous complaint" to the Federal Court. The Federal Court waived the collection of comments. According to Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG, the substantiation requirements are specified. The previous instance detailed the non-admission decision. The complaint to the Federal Court does not engage with the considerations of the previous instance and obviously does not meet the substantiation requirements. Due to insufficient justification, the complaint is not admitted in the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 BGG. The revision procedure before the previous instance is not affected by the decision of the Federal Court. No costs are charged; any request for free legal assistance is moot. No party compensation is awarded.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint is declared inadmissible, and no costs are incurred. The parties involved are informed that the judgment is made in writing.
1C_590/2025: Judgment regarding police exclusion order
Summary of the Facts
The Cantonal Police of Bern issued an exclusion order according to Art. 83 of the cantonal Police Act (PolG/BE) against A.________, prohibiting him from entering a specific area around the Russian embassy. After the Department of Security Bern confirmed the order, the Administrative Court of Bern did not admit the complaint from A.________ due to insufficient justification. A.________ then approached the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_629/2024: Annulment of the lower court decisions
Summary of the Facts
A.________, born in 1967, applied for benefits from the disability insurance in 2016. His application for a disability pension was rejected in 2020 on the grounds that the degree of disability of 35% was below the threshold of 40%. This decision was confirmed by the Federal Court in ruling 9C_308/2021. In March 2022, A.________ submitted a renewed application for professional measures, which was rejected by the IV office of the Canton of Vaud on August 7, 2023. The previous instance (Cantonal Court of Vaud) denied the complaint filed against this decision. A.________ again appealed to the Federal Court, requesting the annulment of the lower court decisions and a remand for new assessment.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_878/2025: Judgment on the standing of the private plaintiff to appeal in criminal matters
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint against B.________ for false accusation in 2023, which prompted the public prosecutor's office of the Canton of Schaffhausen to initiate an investigation. This was discontinued in 2024. The legal remedy against the discontinuation was rejected by the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Schaffhausen in 2025. A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court, requesting the reopening of the proceedings.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_208/2025: Judgment of the Federal Court
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (A.________) filed a complaint against a judgment of the II. civil law department of the Cantonal Court of Fribourg dated September 22, 2025, which concerns him in the proceedings with the State of Vaud. However, the complaint was withdrawn on November 13, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_166/2025: Decision regarding the complaint concerning a mandate contract
Summary of the Facts
The complainants commissioned the respondent, a lawyer, to represent them in a civil dispute regarding a mortgage on their property. After the end of the mandate, an invoice was issued, the remaining amount of which the complainants did not pay. After a court modification of the invoice and various legal disputes regarding enforcement, the complainants did not pay the outstanding amount, and the lawyer obtained a definitive legal opening. A subsequent complaint from the clients against the decision of the cantonal instance was brought before the Federal Court, which decided on the case.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_609/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against a tax assessment
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Vaud dated September 30, 2025. The subject was a tax assessment, where the question of the admissibility of a late complaint and its sufficient justification was disputed. The previous instance had partially rejected the complainant's complaint due to missing deadlines and insufficient justification.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_659/2023: Refund of security deposits and procedural rights
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ demands the refund of CHF 40,000 from security deposits made to secure the release of her spouse C.________. She claims that these securities were provided by her. The cantonal instance declared her corresponding requests inadmissible. The Federal Court had previously assessed a partial aspect in a prior procedure (January 17, 2022, 6B_367/2020, 6B_369/2020) and partially upheld the complaint of the complainant's spouse. The complainant argues that the cantonal instance violated her right to be heard and wrongly denied her party status. Additionally, she disputes the final allocation of the security deposit to procedural costs and partially to a compensation payment to the opposing party B.________.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_669/2025: Appeal against the Office for Migration and the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ requested the Federal Court, in particular, to establish his statelessness and to oblige the Canton of Basel-Landschaft to issue travel and identity documents for stateless persons. He filed a corresponding appeal for delay or refusal of justice against the Migration Office and the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft, as they had not responded to his submissions.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_430/2025: Judgment on intentional homicide, sentencing, and expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ was accused of having committed the act of intentional homicide of an acquaintance, B.________, on March 3, 2022, by attacking him with a wooden club and subsequently with fists and feet, resulting in B.________'s death from his injuries. Further charges included theft, trespassing, and minor fraud. The previous instance imposed a prison sentence of 13 years and an expulsion of twelve years.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_635/2025: Judgment regarding demolition permit and building permit for replacement buildings as well as disqualification and free legal aid
Summary of the Facts
A.A. and B.A. filed a complaint with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Thurgau against an interim decision of the Department of Construction and Environment of the Canton of Thurgau, which had rejected their request for disqualification and request for free legal aid. The Administrative Court did not admit the complaint due to lack of cost advance. Subsequently, A.A. and B.A. filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the decision of the Administrative Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_663/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint regarding construction and planning law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (A.________) submitted a building application to the municipality of Emmen for the renovation of a residential house. The municipality granted a building permit with conditions and requirements, including an exception permit to reduce the distance from the street. The complainant filed an administrative court complaint, which was rejected by the Cantonal Court of Lucerne. The complainant appealed this decision to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_557/2024: Decision regarding the termination of a lease agreement and its challenge
Summary of the Facts
The landlord, a corporation, terminated the lease of a doctor's commercial premises because he and his family were officially registered at the business address – allegedly contrary to the agreed use for commercial purposes. The tenant applied to challenge the termination, claiming that the naming of the address served purely administrative purposes and the premises were never used as a residence. The previous instances declared the termination null and void due to lack of legal basis and unreasonable justification.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_594/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint regarding supplementary benefits to IV
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, born in 1976, has been receiving a disability pension since October 2020. In December 2023, she applied for supplementary benefits with the responsible service in Geneva. Due to documents not submitted in time, in particular a decision on occupational pension (BVG pension), the processing of her application was suspended in July 2024. A new decision was only made in January 2025, which granted benefits from October 2024. The complainant demanded supplementary benefits from December 2023 before the cantonal justice, which was ultimately denied.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_896/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.A.________ filed a criminal complaint for negligent homicide against the staff of the University Hospital Basel. He alleged medical treatment errors, the administration of disputed medications, and suffocation caused by morphine administration. The public prosecutor's office of Basel-Stadt discontinued the proceedings due to lack of criminal relevance. The Court of Appeal of Basel-Stadt confirmed this and classified the discontinuation order as procedural closure according to Art. 319 ff. StPO. The complainant requests the Federal Court to reopen the proceedings.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_723/2025: Approval of a complaint due to bias
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, a lawyer, was charged with qualified disloyal management before the District Court of Lausanne. After various instance decisions and the annulment of a first-instance judgment by the appellate courts due to serious procedural defects, A.________ requested the dismissal of the chairman of the first-instance court, Lionel Chambour, due to bias. This request was rejected by the cantonal appellate instance, leading to the present complaint to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_279/2025: Judgment regarding the application for free legal aid of a legal entity
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ SA, a company engaged in the agro-industry of hemp, filed a payment claim against the lawyer B.________ at the District Court of Sarine. He is alleged to have caused the expiration of claims against the State of Fribourg through erroneous actions. The company also requested free legal aid for the legal costs. The previous instances denied the granting, as the company and its economic owner were not classified as indigent and further assets were available.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_129/2025: Insurance obligation at the Swiss Accident Insurance Institution (CNA) for cleaning companies
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ SA, a cleaning company, opposes the decision of the Swiss Accident Insurance Institution (CNA), which established the insurance obligation for its employees under Art. 66 para. 1 LAA and Art. 73 lit. b OLAA starting January 1, 2022. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed this decision at the previous instance. A.________ SA requested the Federal Court to annul or remand it.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.