Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you can find the latest judgments of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we provide you with detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositive parts. 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 rulings tailored to your areas of law.
9C_583/2025: Decision regarding the rejection of free legal aid in a disability insurance proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, who applied for a disability insurance pension before the Cantonal Court of Vaud, simultaneously requested free legal aid and a deferral for submitting the required documents. The cantonal authority rejected the free legal aid and set a deadline for the payment of a process cost advance, threatening non-admittance.
Summary of the Considerations
E.1 The Federal Court examined whether the appeal against the cantonal decision regarding free legal aid is admissible and whether an irreparable disadvantage exists according to Art. 93 para. 1 lit. a BGG. It was recognized that the rejection of free legal aid can cause an irreparable disadvantage, as the appellant is significantly disadvantaged by the lack of legal assistance and the absence of the ability to pay the advance demand.
E.2 The cantonal authority had rejected the free legal aid on the grounds that the corresponding application justification and evidence were submitted incompletely. It was emphasized that the appellant could not make use of the right to request a deadline extension.
E.3 The appellant argued that the cantonal authority committed a formal denial of justice by refusing a deadline extension. The Federal Court found that the strict application of procedural rules in this case contradicts the principle of inadmissible formal denial of justice (Art. 29 para. 1 BV).
E.4 The cantonal authority should have granted the appellant a reasonable request for a deadline, as this would not impair the goal of a swift procedure, and the rejection of the request is disproportionate.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The appeal was upheld, the decision of the lower court was overturned, and the case was referred back to the cantonal authority. No court costs are incurred, and the Canton of Vaud must pay the appellant CHF 3,000 for the costs of the proceedings.
9C_644/2025: Judgment on tax assessment at discretion and missed deadline
Summary of the Facts
The taxpayer A.________ did not submit a tax return for the tax period 2023 despite public requests and reminders. The municipal tax office then assessed him at its discretion. A later submitted tax return was accepted as an objection by the cantonal tax office but was not considered due to the missed deadline. After legal remedies before the tax appeal court and the administrative court of the Canton of Zurich, A.________ appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The lower court found that the objection period had expired on December 16, 2024, due to the fiction of delivery. The tax return submitted on January 8, 2025, was late. The Federal Court adopts the facts according to Art. 105 para. 1 BGG.
- **E.2:** For an appeal to the Federal Court, a qualified justification obligation applies according to Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG. General criticism without reference to the lower court's considerations is insufficient.
- **E.3:** The taxpayer does not comment on the legality of the non-admittance but primarily addresses the financial burden and his personal situation. Thus, the appeal does not meet the legal requirements.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The appeal is dismissed, non-admittance is declared, and court costs are imposed on the appellant.
9C_530/2025: Inadmissibility of the appeal
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a married person without employment, contested the decision of the Cantonal Compensation Fund to calculate personal contributions for the year 2021. The cantonal insurance court of the Canton of Ticino partially overturned this decision, referred the matter back for reassessment to the compensation fund, and awarded the appellant compensation of CHF 2,000, which A.________ considered too low. She appealed the judgment of the Cantonal Court to the Federal Court and demanded CHF 5,000 or a new decision from the Cantonal Court based on the procedural costs.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The Federal Court examines its jurisdiction and the admissibility of the appeal ex officio. Decisions on cost and compensation regulations are considered ancillary decisions, for which the same admissibility requirements apply as for decisions on the main subject of dispute. - **E.2:** The main subject of dispute is a referral decision of the court of the Canton of Ticino, which is an interim decision and does not conclude the proceedings. - **E.3:** The interim decision on costs and compensation does not cause an irreparable disadvantage according to Art. 93 para. 1 lit. a BGG. The appellant can raise this question again in a later appeal procedure against the final decision. - **E.4:** In the absence of an irreparable disadvantage, the appeal is to be declared obviously inadmissible under the procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. a BGG.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The appeal is declared inadmissible, court costs are imposed on the appellant, and no party compensation is awarded.
8C_674/2025: Judgment on social assistance and procedural prerequisites
Summary of the Facts
Disputed was the non-admittance of the lower court to an appeal by the appellant, who opposed a repayment demand from social assistance. The lower court justified its non-admittance by stating that the appellant had failed to meet the legal requirement to personally sign the appeal document despite an appropriate deadline extension (§ 43 para. 3 VRPG/AG).
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_228/2025: Judgment on supplementary taxes and deduction of travel costs for the tax periods 2016 and 2017
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court deals with tax procedures for the tax periods 2016 to 2017 concerning supplementary taxes and fines. The lower court affirmed the existence of undeclared bank assets and the obligation to pay supplementary taxes and denied the deduction of travel costs for property management. The taxpayer disputes the existence of new facts and demands the deduction of travel costs.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_656/2025: Non-admittance of the appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant submitted an email, which was treated as an appeal by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich. However, the cantonal court did not admit it, as the email did not meet the formal requirements and no suitable object of complaint was apparent.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_619/2025: Denial of a disability pension claim
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, registered with the IV Office of the Canton of Bern in 2023 with complaints such as recurring depressive phases, social phobia, and isolation for benefits entitlement. After medical and occupational assessments, as well as a report from Dr. med. B.________, a disability degree of 33% was determined, leading the IV Office to deny entitlement to a disability pension. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern confirmed this denial.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.