Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most recent 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 Lexplorer portal. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your areas of law.
6B_913/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint in a criminal matter: Violation of the LCR
Summary of the facts
The complainant approached the Federal Court with a complaint against several decisions related to alleged violations of the Road Traffic Act, including an "Alcohol affair" and an "affair over 20 km/h". He criticized, among other things, the delivery of the relevant judgments, felt persecuted by the authorities, and requested impartial legal protection as well as the restoration of deadlines.
Summary of the considerations
1. (E.1) The complaint concerns, among other things, judgments from March 7, 2023, and July 13, 2023, as well as a decision of the Criminal Appeals Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Canton of Bern from March 12, 2024. 2. (E.2) The Criminal Appeals Chamber dismissed a complaint against the decision of the Regional Court Jura bernois-Seeland from October 20, 2023, which established the late submission of an objection against a criminal order. 3. (E.3-6) The Federal Court reminds that according to Art. 80 para. 1 BGG, complaints are only admissible against decisions of cantonal final instances or the Federal Criminal Court. The present submission does not meet this requirement. Furthermore, there is a lack of a comprehensible and legally relevant justification to contest the challenged decisions. The blanket accusations of the complainant do not meet the requirements for complaint motivation according to Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG. 4. (E.7) The Court finds that neither the contested decisions nor the cited facts meet the requirements for first-instance obligations, and a legally sufficient justification is lacking. It is therefore not necessary to examine further possible objections such as missed deadlines or irregular deliveries. 5. (E.8-9) The complaint is to be dismissed due to clear inadmissibility in the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 BGG.
Summary of the dispositive
The complaint was declared inadmissible, court costs were not imposed, and the decision was communicated to the respective parties.
7B_917/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against a decision not to initiate proceedings
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a decision not to initiate proceedings by the Public Prosecutor's Office of Solothurn from July 1, 2025, to the Higher Court of the Canton of Solothurn, which dismissed the complaint on August 21, 2025. He subsequently filed a complaint in criminal matters to the Federal Court against this decision.
Summary of the considerations
The complaint does not meet the requirements for justification according to Art. 42 para. 2 and Art. 106 para. 2 BGG. In particular, the complainant does not present a civil claim within the meaning of Art. 81 para. 1 lit. b no. 5 BGG, which would legitimize him to file a complaint. Furthermore, the submission does not contain formal complaints that could be examined separately. Due to insufficient justification, the complaint is not considered in the simplified procedure (Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b and para. 3 BGG). The court costs are imposed on the complainant due to the loss (Art. 66 para. 1 BGG). The request for free legal assistance is rejected, as the complaint was assessed as hopeless and the claimed neediness was not substantiated despite the request.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Court did not consider the complaint, rejected the request for free legal assistance, and imposed the court costs on the complainant.
4A_180/2025: Decision regarding the jurisdiction of the court in an international sports arbitration case
Summary of the facts
The complainant (an Argentine player agent) filed a claim before the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS) that the respondent (an Italian football club B.________) is liable as the sporting successor of a former club C.________ for the outstanding payment of 2,450,000 EUR under a commission contract. The TAS declared itself incompetent to adjudicate the dispute on March 7, 2025. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court to annul the arbitral award and to determine the jurisdiction of the TAS.
Summary of the considerations
- E.1: Establishment of the language of the proceedings and indication that the judgment is issued in French, as the submissions of the parties before the Federal Court were drafted in this language. E.2: The appeal process in international arbitration is permissible according to Arts. 190–192 LDIP. Since the seat of the TAS is in Lausanne and both parties had no connection to Switzerland, the provisions of Chapter 12 LDIP are applicable. E.3: Examination of the admissibility criteria of the complaint. There are no obstacles to the complaint, subject to the examination of its justification. E.4: Limitation of the review by the Federal Court to the complaint grounds conclusively listed in Art. 190 para. 2 LDIP. Requirements for argumentation precision in the complaint are heightened; appellate critique is inadmissible. E.5: E.5.1: The complainant alleged that the arbitrators wrongly denied their jurisdiction (Art. 190 para. 2 lit. b LDIP). E.5.2: The arbitrators examined whether the arbitration clause in the commission contract could be extended to the respondent, particularly through so-called sporting succession. E.5.3: The arbitrators found that the concept of sporting succession is neither known in Swiss law nor in the Code of Obligations and is therefore not suitable to establish jurisdiction. Furthermore, the respondent showed no intention of being contractually bound to the arbitration clause. E.5.5: The Federal Court confirmed the careful examination of the arbitrators and pointed out that the complainant's argumentation was neither normatively nor legally sufficiently justified to establish the jurisdiction of the TAS. E.6: The complainant claimed a violation of his right to be heard (Art. 190 para. 2 lit. d LDIP). The Federal Court rejected this allegation, as the arbitrators had taken the relevant arguments into account, even though they had reached a different assessment.
Summary of the dispositive
The complaint was dismissed, and the court costs as well as a party compensation were imposed on the complainant.
5A_971/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the facts
The Federal Court examined a complaint from A.________ Sagl in liquidation against the declaration of bankruptcy confirmed by the Higher Court of the Canton of Ticino (Chamber for Debt Collection and Bankruptcy). This was initiated at the request of the cantonal compensation fund AVS/AI/IPG, after the debtor could not sufficiently prove her solvency, despite settling part of her liabilities.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_113/2025: Judgment on the joint storage of firearms in a household
Summary of the facts
A.A.________ requested the police of the Canton of Solothurn to allow the joint storage of firearms belonging to him and his son, both of whom possess the required firearm permits. The request was denied by the police command of the Canton of Solothurn. The appeal to the cantonal authorities, including the Administrative Court of Solothurn, was also unsuccessful. A.A.________ contested the matter before the Federal Court and demanded the joint storage of firearms and ammunition.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_504/2025: Measures under the Protection Against Violence Act
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a complaint against a ruling of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, which had not considered his complaint against a decision of the District Court of Zurich because the complaint was submitted late. The Federal Court examined the complaint against the decision of the Administrative Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1010/2025: Decision on the question of non-admittance regarding a complaint about the termination of proceedings
Summary of the facts
The complainant, A.A.________, filed a complaint against the termination decision of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Baden from August 15, 2025, which had terminated proceedings regarding the circumstances of the death of his mother B.A.________. The lower court, the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau, did not consider the complaint on September 8, 2025. The complainant then requested the Federal Court on September 29, 2025, to review this decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_872/2025: Request for recusal in a criminal matter
Summary of the facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Aargau is conducting a criminal investigation against A.________ for various offenses, including embezzlement and fraud. A.________ requested the recusal of the responsible public prosecutor B.________, as she suspected him of bias, particularly due to his examination of documents during an ongoing sealing period. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau rejected the recusal request.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1128/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint in criminal matters
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed a complaint against the decision not to initiate proceedings by the Public Prosecutor's Office of Rheinfelden-Laufenburg from September 1, 2025. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau did not consider the decision on October 15, 2025. The complainant then filed a complaint in criminal matters to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_268/2025: Revision of an international sports arbitration case
Summary of the facts
The plaintiff, a professional football player, requests the revision of an arbitral award from the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS) dated August 8, 2019. In the present proceedings, the defendant player agent was previously criminally convicted of forgery and fraud for presenting forged documents to the TAS to claim an unjustified commission. The plaintiff requests a declaration of nullity or the annulment of the original arbitral award.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_893/2025: Proceedings concerning suspensive effect in connection with a seizure certificate
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed several complaints against a seizure certificate as well as further procedural actions in the context of debt collection. The lower courts partially did not consider her complaints or dismissed them. The complainant then filed a complaint against the decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich, which did not consider a request for suspensive effect. In the subsequent proceedings before the Federal Court, the complainant did not provide the requested cost advance, which resulted in the termination of the proceedings.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_871/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint in criminal matters due to insufficient justification
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters on October 25, 2025, against the decision of the Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Fribourg from September 4, 2025, which dismissed A.________'s appeal against a decision by the district judge of the district of Saane from May 13, 2025, which declared the objection against a criminal order from December 16, 2024, inadmissible due to lateness. A.________ requested that his objection be recognized as admissible.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_530/2023: Judgment on special security measures in pre-trial detention
Summary of the facts
A.________ was in pre-trial detention due to suspicion of robbery at the Grosshof correctional facility. Due to a psychotic condition, he was temporarily transferred to the Lucerne Psychiatry (LUPS). After being returned to the detention facility, he was placed in a security cell as a special security measure by the facility management. The measure lasted eleven days and was confirmed by the Department of Justice and Security of the Canton of Lucerne and later by the Cantonal Court of Lucerne. A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters and claimed inhuman and disproportionate treatment.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_230/2025: Jurisdiction of the TAS under FIFA regulations regarding the observance of deadlines for claims
Summary of the facts
A Spanish professional football club (A.________) is suing another club (B.________) for financial obligations arising from a Memorandum of Cooperation that ended on June 30, 2021. FIFA rejected the claim as late according to Art. 23 para. 3 RSTJ. Subsequently, A.________ appealed to the TAS, which declared itself incompetent, leading to the present course of complaint before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_792/2025: Change of official defense
Summary of the facts
A.________ was assigned an official defender by the Office of the Public Prosecutor of the Canton of Zurich on September 12, 2023. On June 11 and 12, 2025, he requested a change of his official defense, which was denied by the District Court of Zurich and subsequently by the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich. A.________ is bringing these decisions before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_669/2025: Revocation of driving license due to an offense abroad
Summary of the facts
The motor vehicle authority of the Canton of Solothurn revoked the complainant A.________'s driving license for 12 months due to a serious offense in Serbia and ordered attendance at traffic education for repeat alcohol offenders. The unlawful act consisted of driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol (1.49 g/kg blood alcohol). The lower court, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn, dismissed the complaint against this decision. The complainant requested, among other things, the annulment of the judgment and the inclusion of the complete records of the Serbian criminal proceedings before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_941/2025: Non-admittance of the complaint due to lack of justification
Summary of the facts
The complainant submitted a complaint to the Federal Court. He alleged denial of justice and demanded the annulment of the decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau, which had not considered or had dismissed a complaint for denial of justice. The dispute concerned, among other things, the justification of a decision of the District Court of Brugg in the context of a civil procedure.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_685/2025: Decision on the extradition of A.________
Summary of the facts
A.________, a French and Cameroonian national, was sentenced by the Tribunal correctionnel de Boulogne-sur-Mer to 18 months in prison for illegal activities. The Federal Office of Justice (OFJ) approved the extradition to France on June 17, 2025. A.________ filed an objection citing political offense, which was dismissed by the lower court, the Appeals Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court. He then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_683/2025: Decision regarding the granting of a short-term residence permit
Summary of the facts
The complainant, a Cameroonian, requested a short-term residence permit based on Art. 21 para. 3 LEI after his asylum applications were rejected and a legally valid deportation decision was made. Despite holding a degree in Switzerland, the competent office rejected his applications, referring to the exclusivity of the asylum process. The complainant appealed to various courts, which all dismissed his complaints.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_970/2025: Judgment regarding the complaint against the dismissal of a challenge to the enforcement of a seizure
Summary of the facts
In the context of a debt enforcement procedure of the Canton of Basel-Stadt against A.B.________, the debt enforcement office of Mendrisio issued a loss certificate for CHF 689.35 on September 24, 2025, after an unsuccessful seizure was carried out. The cantonal supervisory authority rejected the complaint of the debtor, which had been filed against the actions of the debt enforcement office on October 9, 2025, on October 22, 2025. It classified the complainant's claims as inadequate, unfounded, or irrelevant and specifically dismissed the objection to the incorrect spelling of the complainant's name in the debt enforcement records as unfounded.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_682/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against the substantive assessment of intellectual or physical abilities
Summary of the facts
A.________'s failed maturity examination from August/September 2025 led to a complaint proceeding before the Federal Administrative Court against the decision of the Swiss Maturity Commission. After the rejection of requests for super-provisional and provisional measures as well as free legal assistance, the Federal Administrative Court declared several reconsideration requests and the complaint ultimately inadmissible. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the last interim decision of the Federal Administrative Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_19/2025: Assessment of the refusal of a residence permit for family reunification
Summary of the facts
The Kosovo national A.A.________ applied for a residence permit in the context of family reunification to live with his wife and son in Switzerland. The competent migration office refused the permit, as there were indications of a sham marriage and insufficient financial means. The Cantonal Court of Fribourg confirmed the refusal and the rejection of the application for free legal assistance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_612/2023: Dismissal of the complaint due to alleged abuse of assets
Summary of the facts
A.________, a businessman from Geneva, filed a criminal complaint in 2021 against B.________ for alleged abuse of assets. The case involves financial transactions and an oral agreement among investors in the context of a real estate claim. The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Vaud did not pursue the complaint. This decision was later confirmed by the cantonal criminal law appeals chamber.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1397/2024: Judgment on drug trafficking and asset seizure
Summary of the facts
The complainant, a Spanish national with a residence permit in Switzerland, was convicted of qualified drug trafficking (Art. 19 para. 2 lit. a BetmG) and drug use (Art. 19a para. 1 BetmG). The lower court imposed a prison sentence of 16 months (partially suspended) and a fine of 500 francs, confirmed the seizure of assets, and maintained the arrest on part of his assets. The complainant particularly disputed the severity of the sentence, the replacement claim, and the continued existence of the arrest.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_272/2025: Unsealing of data carriers in criminal proceedings
Summary of the facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office is conducting a criminal investigation against A.________ on suspicion of multiple sexual acts with a child and multiple pornography. He is suspected of having pressured the minor B.________ to send him photographic recordings of a sexual nature. On December 4, 2024, extensive electronic material was seized during a house search, which was sealed. The Public Prosecutor's Office requested the unsealing of these data carriers, while the complainant demanded the dismissal of the application and the separation of certain data. On February 21, 2025, the coercive measures court ordered the unsealing, against which A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.