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 dispositives. 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.
1C_714/2025: Non-acceptance due to late filing of complaint
Summary of the Facts
The subject of the dispute concerns the denied authorization to conduct a criminal investigation against employees of the city clerk's office and the collection office. The previous instance, the High Court of the Canton of Zurich, denied the authorization in its decision of September 23, 2025. The Federal Court examined the timeliness of the complaint filing.
Summary of Considerations
The complainant filed a criminal complaint against several employees of the city clerk's office and the collection office. After the files were forwarded by the public prosecutor's offices of Zug and Limmattal/Albis, the High Court of the Canton of Zurich decided to deny the authorization. The complaint was filed with the Federal Court on November 26, 2025, which required examination of its timeliness. According to Art. 44 para. 2 BGG, a judicial delivery is deemed to have occurred at the latest after seven days in the case of an unsuccessful delivery attempt (delivery fiction). The delivery period began on October 4, 2025, and the complaint period ended according to Art. 100 para. 1 BGG on November 3, 2025. Since the filing only occurred in November, the complaint was late and was not accepted. No costs were imposed on the complainant.
Summary of the Dispositive
The dispositive stated that the complaint would not be accepted and that no costs would be imposed. The judgment will be communicated to the parties and the involved authorities.
4A_637/2024: Liability lawsuit against company officials
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, former sole managing director of C.________ SA, was sued by the respondent B.________ SA for damages based on an assignment according to Art. 260 SchKG. The damage is claimed to have been caused by the late registration of the bankruptcy of C.________ SA. The plaintiff was awarded damages of CHF 404,173.75. The previous instance, the II Civil Chamber of the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Ticino, rejected A.________'s appeal and stated that the first instance court had correctly based its damage calculation on Art. 42 para. 2 OR.
Summary of Considerations
**E. 1**: The complainant has correctly raised his claim according to the provisions of federal case law, but the subsidiary reference to the constitutional complaint is irrelevant, as the procedure is of a civil nature and complaints in civil matters are generally permissible. **E. 2.1 to E. 2.2**: The Federal Court applies federal law ex officio (Art. 106 para. 1 BGG), but only examines violations of fundamental rights if they are sufficiently substantiated (Art. 106 para. 2 BGG). Criticisms of an appellate nature are inadmissible. **E. 3 to E. 3.3**: The active legitimacy of the respondent as the assignee according to Art. 260 SchKG is confirmed, as it has the right to assert claims of the bankruptcy estate. The complainant cannot successfully argue that the damage was not lawfully incurred, as this cannot be raised as a defense against the claimed demand according to established case law. **E. 4 to E. 4.3**: The application of Art. 42 para. 2 OR by the previous instance is reaffirmed, as the damage had to be estimated due to unclear account documents. The complainant is accused of not providing sufficient evidence for his claims and in particular of not presenting a plausible argument against the assessment of evidence by the first instance court.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint was dismissed, court costs imposed, and a party compensation was determined. Delivery was made to the party representatives and the previous instance.
2C_62/2025: Judgment on the blocking of a domain due to unauthorized gambling
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SAS, a company based abroad, operates a platform for digital trading cards (NFT) and online games allowing for winnings under "A.________.com". The Inter-Cantonal Gambling Supervisory Authority Gespa ordered the blocking of the domain in Switzerland, as the offered online games require a permit. Complaints and objections against this remained unsuccessful in the previous instances; A.________ SAS filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Summary of Considerations
The Federal Court examined the prerequisites for entry and found that the complaint was filed in a timely and proper manner. The previous instance is considered inter-cantonal and last-instance, so the complaint is admissible. The request to directly lift the blocking order was not accepted due to the devolutive effect. The Federal Court applies the law ex officio and focuses on the alleged deficiencies, unless obvious violations of the law exist. The Gambling Law (BGS) requires the permit for certain gambling activities to ensure their safety and public benefit. Online games without the corresponding permit must be blocked. The complainant did not contest the economic dependence between the sold digital trading cards and the online games. The Federal Court confirmed the previous instance that there is a monetary stake and a monetary gain within the meaning of Art. 3 lit. a BGS. Since the complainant did not possess a valid permit for her gambling activities, the Federal Court confirmed the legality of the domain blocking.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint is dismissed, and the court costs are imposed on the complainant. The judgment will be communicated to the parties involved and the competent authorities.
5D_51/2025: Decision regarding alleged refusal of justice/delay in justice proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint regarding refusal of justice or delay in justice against the Cantonal Court of Lucerne. The background was a dispute regarding two disqualification requests against judges of the District Court of Kriens, which were partially rejected. The Cantonal Court of Lucerne decided on the matter, rendering the federal court proceedings moot.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_914/2025: Inadmissibility
Summary of the Facts
A.________ Sàrl was declared bankrupt immediately by the decision of the president of the District Court La Côte on October 3, 2025. Against this decision, A.________ Sàrl filed a complaint with the cantonal court on October 9, 2025, requesting the preliminary lifting of enforceability (effect of suspensive effect), which was however rejected by the president of the cantonal court on October 10, 2025. Subsequently, A.________ Sàrl filed a complaint with the Federal Court on October 21, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_312/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint regarding the blocking of the commercial register
Summary of the Facts
The proceedings concern a dispute over the ownership and control of A.________ AG and B.________ AG. Both parties claim to be sole shareholders of B.________ AG. A.________ AG filed a lawsuit with the Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich and requested precautionary measures, including a blocking of the commercial register. The Commercial Court rejected the requests of A.________ AG and instead upheld the counter-request of the defendant, establishing commercial register blocks in favor of its registrations.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_403/2024: Judgment regarding building permit for a mobile communication facility outside the construction zone
Summary of the Facts
Sunrise GmbH applied for the conversion of an existing mobile communication facility on a traffic area outside the construction zone in the municipality of Lüsslingen-Nennigkofen, which required an exceptional permit according to Art. 24 RPG. The objections raised against this, including by A.________, were rejected by the cantonal and municipal authorities. A.________ appealed the decisions to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn, which rejected the complaints. With a complaint in public law to the Federal Court, A.________ requested the annulment of the building permit and the referral of the case back to the previous instances.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7F_46/2025: Request for revision against a federal court judgment
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ requested the revision of the judgment of the Swiss Federal Court of July 15, 2025 (7B_415/2025). At that time, the Federal Court did not enter into the complainant's appeal due to an obvious lack of reasoning. In the revision request, A.________ attempted to justify why the judgment should be reviewed.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_226/2025: Non-acceptance of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant addressed the Federal Court after the High Court of the Canton of Thurgau rejected her complaint against a decision on reopening by the District Court of Frauenfeld. The subject of the dispute was the definitive reopening.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_670/2023: New construction of a two-family house in Sachseln: Complaint in public law
Summary of the Facts
E.________ applied in 2019 for a building permit for the new construction of a two-family house in Sachseln, with a reduction of the required number of floors and distance regulations. The local council granted a building permit and the exception permits in 2020. Neighbors raised objections, but these were ultimately rejected by the local council and later by the Administrative Court. The government council revoked the permits, after which the Administrative Court upheld the builder's complaint. The complainants then approached the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_247/2025: Judgment on the issuance of a residence permit (hardship application)
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, an Iranian national, has been residing in Switzerland since 1986 due to an asylum application. He obtained a settlement permit through marriage to a Swiss citizen, which was later revoked due to fraudulent activities towards social welfare authorities. Several attempts to obtain a residence permit or asylum status failed. Due to enforcement obstacles, he was granted provisional admission in 2022. The complainant applied again for a residence permit in 2023 due to hardship, which was rejected.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_685/2025: Decision on the reinstatement of a residence permit – Non-acceptance due to obvious inadmissibility
Summary of the Facts
The Kosovar national A.________, originally holding a residence permit EU/EFTA, which was lawfully revoked, applied for the reinstatement of a residence and work permit in Switzerland. The application was rejected by the cantonal office for migration and integration. The cantonal authorities also rejected his objection and complaint against this decision. A.________ filed a complaint in public law with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_514/2025: Judgment on the non-extension of a residence permit and expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The Turkish national A.________ entered Switzerland in 2023 after marrying a settled compatriot in 2022. The marital community was separated on December 1, 2023. The migration office of the Canton of Solothurn denied him the extension of his residence permit and ordered his expulsion from Switzerland and the Schengen area. After an unsuccessful complaint to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn, he filed a complaint in public law with the Federal Court, which examined his application for a residence permit.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2D_10/2024: Illegality of an award decision in public procurement
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG, as the second-placed bidder in the award procedure of the municipality of St. Moritz for electrical installations high voltage, contested the award to the ARGE B.________ due to violations by the member D.________ AG against provisions of the collective labor agreement. After an initial rejection by the Federal Court, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden conducted additional factual clarifications and again rejected the complaint. It argued that the company D.________ AG had no knowledge of the later established violations at the time of the award. A.________ AG filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint to the Federal Court, which classified the award as unlawful.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_42/2025: Judgment on the division of property and cost consequences in divorce
Summary of the Facts
The parties, A.________ (complainant) and B.________ (respondent), divorced after 20 years of marriage. The District Court of Zurich regulated the consequences of divorce, including property claims, adult maintenance, and post-marital support. A.________ contested the partial regulations, whereby the High Court of the Canton of Zurich reduced the post-marital support and dismissed the other points of appeal. With the present complaint, A.________ questioned the property division and the cost consequences.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_233/2025: Refusal to extend the residence permit of a Kosovar national after divorce
Summary of the Facts
The Kosovar national A.________ lived in Switzerland since 2019 after marrying a Slovenian national and held a temporary residence permit. The marriage was divorced in 2023, and A.________ then applied for an extension of his residence permit, which was rejected by the migration office of the Canton of Zurich. He filed a complaint against the rejecting decisions of the security directorate and the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_864/2025: Decision on non-acceptance order and non-acceptance of a complaint
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court examined a complaint in criminal matters directed against the non-acceptance order of the Regional Public Prosecutor's Office Bern-Mittelland and the associated decision of the High Court of the Canton of Bern. The complaint was deemed obviously inadmissible, as the prerequisites for legal standing were not met and no formal objections were raised. The applicant's request for free legal assistance was also dismissed.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_207/2025: Judgment on challenging a discretionary assessment
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG (formerly B.________ AG) contested a discretionary assessment by the cantonal tax office of Zurich for the tax period 2021. The company had not submitted a timely tax return in either the Canton of Zurich or the Canton of Thurgau despite reminders. Consequently, the tax office of Zurich made a discretionary assessment, which was challenged by the company as null and void. The previous instances dismissed the objection due to late reasoning and further legal prerequisites. The point of contention before the Federal Court was the question of the nullity of the discretionary assessment of the tax office of Zurich.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_365/2025: Serious bodily injury through negligence
Summary of the Facts
On February 22, 2018, employee C.________ suffered severe injuries in a work accident at the vineyard of A.________, resulting in the amputation of the right arm and part of the ear. The accident occurred during work with a prototype forestry machine, the safety devices of which had been removed. A.________ and B.________ were convicted of serious bodily injury through negligence.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_436/2023: Decision regarding dog keeping and classification in breed type list II in the Canton of Zurich
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ keeps his dog B.________ in the Canton of Zurich. Due to external characteristics, the dog was classified by the cantonal authorities in breed type list II, which includes potentially dangerous breeds and whose keeping is prohibited in the Canton of Zurich. The cantonal veterinary office ordered the definitive confiscation of the dog unless A.________ rehouses the dog or removes it within the deadline. A.________ contested this up to the Federal Court, arguing that the classification was arbitrary and violated his fundamental right to personal freedom.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_709/2025: Judgment regarding authorization procedure and disqualification request
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint and a subsequent supplementary request against B.________, who is a caseworker with prosecutorial powers. He also demanded her disqualification. The prosecution chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen combined these proceedings and denied the authorization for prosecution and the handling of the disqualification request.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_79/2025: Judgment regarding the extension of study time and access to files under the Disability Equality Act
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, suffers from cognitive impairments after a traumatic brain injury and has been admitted to the Master's program in Environmental Science at ETH Zurich since 2019. After reaching the maximum study time, he requested an extension of three and a half years according to the Disability Equality Act (BehiG). ETH Zurich granted him a two-semester extension and set conditions for a further extension. Additionally, A.________ requested access to files from previous proceedings, which was denied. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed ETH Zurich's decision regarding the study time extension and dismissed the request for access to files.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_334/2025: Causal relationship in an accident with shoulder injuries
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, suffered a work injury on September 23, 2021, when he fell on his right shoulder and back, sustaining contusions. The Swiss Accident Insurance (CNA) granted benefits until June 5, 2022, but then denied further payments on the grounds that the health complaints were no longer in a natural causal relationship with the accident. Following a judicial expert opinion, the previous instance nevertheless granted benefits to the complainant until September 21, 2024. The CNA filed a complaint against this.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_866/2025: Judgment regarding non-acceptance in criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the High Court of the Canton of Zurich against two non-acceptance orders of the District Attorney's Office of the District of Pfäffikon, which were dismissed on August 22, 2025. The complainant subsequently filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8F_17/2025: Non-acceptance of a revision request regarding unemployment insurance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a revision request with the Federal Court against its judgment of September 19, 2025 (8C_495/2025) concerning unemployment insurance. The applicant was requested to pay a cost advance of CHF 500, which he did not provide either within the original deadline or within an extended deadline.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_991/2025: Inadmissibility of a late complaint against a non-acceptance order
Summary of the Facts
The complainant submitted a complaint to the Federal Court against the decision of the High Court of the Canton of Zug, I. Complaint Division, of August 19, 2025. This decision concerned the non-acceptance of a criminal procedure by the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Zug. However, the complainant's complaint was submitted late, leading to non-acceptance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_713/2025: Decision regarding authorization procedure
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint against B.________, a former public prosecutor, as well as against employees of the Cantonal Police of St. Gallen. He accused them of arbitrariness, racism, and abuse of office. The prosecution chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen denied the authorization to initiate a criminal proceeding.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_310/2025: Judgment regarding a complaint against a road construction project with expropriations
Summary of the Facts
The property owner A.________ is contesting a road construction project for the cantonal road No. 55 in the municipality of Wolfhalden, which includes renovation and expansion works and is associated with expropriations and temporary claims on her parcel. The previous instances, including the High Court of the Canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden, dismissed the complaint. A.________ challenged this before the Federal Court with a complaint in public law.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_676/2025: Decision regarding a supervisory complaint and the dismissal of a procedure due to withdrawal
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ had submitted a supervisory complaint against lawyer B.________ to the Bar Association of the Canton of Aargau, which was dismissed as unfounded. Her subsequently filed complaint with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau was not substantively addressed, as she had no party rights as a complainant and thus was not legitimized. After she refused to pay her cost advance and ultimately withdrew her complaint, the Administrative Court dismissed the procedure as completed without imposing procedural costs. Against this decision, the complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_784/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint regarding the annulment of a bankruptcy decision
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SA was declared bankrupt at the request of the Cassa cantonale di compensazione AVS/AI/IPG by the decision of the first instance court on May 15, 2025. After an appeal to the cantonal appeals authority was dismissed, A.________ SA in liquidation filed a complaint in civil matters with the Federal Court, aiming to refer the case back to the previous instance for re-evaluation and to suspend the enforcement of the bankruptcy decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_910/2025: Decision regarding alleged refusal of justice/delay in justice by the Cantonal Court of Lucerne in connection with a disqualification request
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was involved in several enforcement proceedings by B.________ AG and filed a lawsuit and complaint before the District Court of Kriens, presided over by two district judges. A disqualification request against the district judges was rejected. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Lucerne and claimed refusal of justice and delay in justice before the Federal Court. The Cantonal Court has since decided on the complaint, rendering the federal court proceedings moot.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_556/2025: Non-acceptance of a complaint against an arbitration award of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS)
Summary of the Facts
A professional football club filed a complaint against an arbitration award of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS), which confirmed a previous decision of the Players' Status Chamber of FIFA. The complaint was found to be obviously inadmissible by the Federal Court, as it was not filed in a timely manner.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_510/2025: Non-acceptance of a complaint regarding a revision request
Summary of the Facts
The complainant challenges a decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne from August 22, 2025, in which a revision request was rejected. The Federal Court examined the admissibility of the complaint and decided not to enter into it due to a lack of timely and sufficient reasoning.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_127/2025: Revocation of a settlement permit and issuance of a residence permit
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a Turkish national, has been residing in Switzerland since 1988 and has held a settlement permit since 1997. Due to various criminal convictions, significant debt management, and ongoing social welfare dependence, his settlement permit was revoked and replaced with a residence permit. A.________ cited health problems and challenged the downgrade by the Office for Migration and Integration of the Canton of Aargau as well as the prior instance's dismissal of his complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_678/2025: Judgment on the complaint regarding precautionary measures in the area of unemployment insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant requested precautionary measures in the previous instance's delay of justice complaint procedure regarding the review of her entitlement to unemployment compensation. The cantonal court rejected the request, as the complainant had not fulfilled her duty to cooperate, the urgency was self-induced, and thus no super-provisional measures appeared necessary.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_687/2025: Judgment regarding a voting complaint on the popular initiatives
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a voting complaint with the government council of the Canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden regarding the popular votes of November 30, 2025, on two popular initiatives. She demanded the cancellation of the votes or the annulment of the voting results. The government council dismissed her complaint, as far as it dealt with it, and imposed procedural costs of CHF 500 on her. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Court and reiterated her legal requests.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_350/2025: Decision regarding the downgrading of a residence permit to a settlement permit
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a national of B.________ living in Switzerland since 1990, held a settlement permit which was revoked and replaced by a residence permit by the migration service of the Canton of Neuchâtel due to his long-term and significant dependence on social assistance (over CHF 382,000 in debt). The complainant unsuccessfully sought to maintain his settlement permit without conditions and repeatedly filed complaints against the downgrade of this permit with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_170/2025: Decision of the Federal Court regarding a building application outside the construction zone (non-acceptance)
Summary of the Facts
The complainant intended to make structural adjustments on a parcel in the agricultural zone of the municipality of Seewis in the Prättigau. The original building permit was granted on December 4, 2020. Unauthorized construction work occurred, leading to a construction stop. Repeated inspections and correspondence took place. The municipal council of Seewis rejected the subsequent approval of the amended building plans and ordered the restoration of the lawful condition. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden dismissed the builder's complaint against this decision. The complainant then approached the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_242/2025: Complaint against the refusal of a confirmation order and access to files by ETH Zurich
Summary of the Facts
A.________, now excluded from the Master's program, requested a confirmation order on specific questions regarding organizational and study-related aspects at ETH Zurich, as well as access to files from previous proceedings.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.