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 dispositions. 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 you will receive the latest judgments tailored to your areas of law.
8C_286/2025: Judgment on Disability Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, a former caseworker, applied for disability insurance in 2019, among other reasons due to spinal and shoulder complaints. After medical and professional assessments, including a psychiatric-orthopedic report, the IV office Basel-Stadt denied a pension claim in 2023, stating that there was no permanent limitation of work capacity. The social insurance court of the canton of Basel-Stadt confirmed this assessment after obtaining an additional opinion from an expert. The complainant appealed to the Federal Court, requesting a quarter pension from February 2020 and a three-quarter pension from August 2022.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** Principles of review in the procedure of complaints in public law matters. The Federal Court reviews the alleged legal defects and only intervenes in the findings of the previous instance in cases of obvious incorrectness. - **E.2:** The point of contention is whether the cantonal court rightly denied a pension claim from February 2020, based on Art. 28 IVG. - **E.3:** The previous instance relied on a comprehensive report, which affirmed the complainant's work capacity in the previous occupation. The Federal Court finds no arbitrariness in the assessment of the medical records by the cantonal court. - **E.3.2:** The choice of examination methods by experts is at their discretion; the previous instance correctly accepted this approach. - **E.3.3:** The experts dealt with differing medical assessments and justified their findings in a comprehensible manner. - **E.3.4:** No violation of federal law by the previous instance in denying a pension claim.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint was dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on the complainant. The judgment was communicated to the relevant parties.
7B_799/2025: Change of Official Defense Attorney
Summary of the Facts
A. The complainant was sentenced to four years in prison by the criminal court of the canton of Geneva. After his conviction, at the request of the complainant, his official defense attorney was changed. The new appointment took place on June 4, 2025. Following the filing of a personal appeal by the complainant and a further inadequate appeal declaration by the new defense attorney, the president of the appeals chamber of the Geneva court decided to replace the attorney due to lack of diligence. The complainant challenged this decision before the Federal Court and requested to keep his attorney.
Summary of the Considerations
1. **(E.1)**: The complaint is admitted as it was filed in a timely manner and concerns a cantonal final decision. The contested decision could cause irreparable harm.
2. **(E.2.1)**: The complainant criticizes the assessment of the previous instance, according to which the official defense attorney violated his duties of care.
2. **(E.2.2)**: The Federal Court emphasizes that the right to effective defense must be guaranteed. A change of the official defense attorney is only justified if effective defense can no longer be ensured.
2. **(E.2.3)**: The behavior of the attorney, obtaining court documents only on the last day of the collection deadline, does not justify removal from office, as this was neither systematic nor demonstrably detrimental to the defense. The submission of an inadequate appeal declaration also did not lead to a procedural loss, as the complainant had previously submitted a valid appeal.
3. **(E.2.4)**: The Federal Court finds that the allegations made are not sufficient to justify the removal of the attorney. Future violations could, however, be assessed differently.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint is upheld, the decision of the previous instance is overturned, and the attorney is granted compensation. Furthermore, no court costs were imposed.
1C_679/2024: Access to Official Files of the Child and Adult Protection Authority of Schaffhausen; Principle of Publicity
Summary of the Facts
A lawyer (complainant) requests access to files of the Child and Adult Protection Authority of the canton of Schaffhausen (KESB) from 2022, concerning replacement measures and state liability proceedings. The KESB refused access and requested fees for it. The Higher Court of the canton of Schaffhausen confirmed the refusal of access but lowered the fees. The complainant appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E. 1:** The formal requirements for the admissibility of the complaint are met. - **E. 2:** The complaint can raise violations of federal and cantonal constitutional law. For violations of fundamental rights, qualified justification requirements apply. - **E. 3:** The complainant relies on the principle of publicity and the right to access files according to Art. 47 para. 3 of the Schaffhausen cantonal constitution, which includes a presumption of free access to official files. Confidentiality is only permissible if overriding public or private interests are present. - **E. 4:** The previous instance incorrectly equated ongoing procedures with procedures where measures decided upon have not yet been completed. This contradicts the principle that procedures end with a legally binding decision. The previous instance erroneously assumed that a special interest in access is required. The complainant only requests anonymized files, which means that personal confidentiality interests are not affected. The previous instance did not examine any specific confidentiality interests and did not establish that anonymization was not possible. - **E. 5:** The KESB must inform the complainant in advance if significant fees for anonymization will be incurred. - **E. 6:** The complainant's request to waive the anonymization of his name is rejected, as the publication must be made anonymously according to the judgment.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint is upheld, and the decisions of the previous instance are overturned. The KESB is instructed to reassess, and no court costs are incurred.
7B_956/2025: Non-admission of a Complaint Against a Non-Prosecution Decision and Considerations Regarding the Legitimacy of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a non-prosecution decision of the Geneva public prosecutor's office (dated May 19, 2025) with the Chambre pénale de recours of the Cour de justice of the Republic and Canton of Geneva, which rejected it with a decision on August 14, 2025. Against this decision, the complainant filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court on September 15, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_664/2025: Judgment Regarding Extradition to Greece and Administration of Justice
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was arrested by Switzerland based on an arrest warrant from Greece. Greece requested extradition for the enforcement of two prison sentences and for conducting a criminal procedure. The Federal Office of Justice (BJ) approved the extradition. The complainant appealed, which was dismissed by the Federal Criminal Court. The appeal to the Federal Court concerns the violation of rights of defense as well as issues regarding limitation and personal presence in the proceedings.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_431/2024: Judgment Regarding Qualified Disloyal Business Management and Compensation Claim
Summary of the Facts
The complainant is accused of multiple counts of qualified disloyal business management. As an asset manager of B.________ GmbH, he is alleged to have withheld retrocessions from May 2006 to December 2016 without adequately informing clients about their nature, extent, and entitlement. This resulted in a financial loss of CHF 2,141,259.05 for 54 affected clients. The complainant intended to unlawfully benefit B.________ GmbH.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_949/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint for Review of a Judgment Regarding Debtor Notification
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ requested the review of a decision of the District Court of Martigny and St-Maurice, which ordered a debtor notification and the securing of maintenance payments for B.A.________. The previous instance, the civil chamber of the cantonal court of Valais, dismissed the review request as well as the appeal against the decision of the District Court. A.A.________ subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_79/2025: Judgment of the Federal Court on the Topic of Pornography and Rule of Law Principles
Summary of the Facts
The defendant A.________ was acquitted of serious pornographic offenses by the Criminal Court of Geneva on February 19, 2024. He was awarded compensation and had to bear the procedural costs himself. On November 27, 2024, the Court of Appeal decided that an appeal by the public prosecutor would be granted and sentenced A.________ to a fine of 144 daily rates for pornography. He was also imposed a fine of CHF 2,880, and the possibility of appeal was denied. A.________ was also permanently excluded from activities requiring regular contact with minors. Numerous pornographic files were found on his computer during a house search.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5D_54/2025: Decision on the Denial of Free Legal Aid in a Collocation Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, who claimed a debt of CHF 20,751.65 in a collocation procedure against the insolvent bank B.________ SA, requested free legal aid. The vice president of the civil court of the canton of Geneva denied her request on June 23, 2025. The appeal against this decision to the vice president of the Geneva judiciary was also dismissed on September 29, 2025. With a complaint dated November 12, 2025, the complainant approached the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_598/2025: Judgment Regarding the Unsealing of IT Data Carriers in a Criminal Proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office II of the canton of Zurich is conducting a criminal proceeding against B.________ for various offenses, including false accusation. In connection with a house search at A.________ in Germany, IT data carriers were secured and transmitted to the Swiss authorities. A.________ requested their sealing, after which the public prosecutor applied for their unsealing. The coercive measures court dismissed the unsealing procedure because A.________ did not respond within the deadline. A.________ appealed against this decision to the Federal Court and alleged a violation of the right to be heard, among other things.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_1053/2025: Decision Regarding a Complaint Against Garnishment Notification
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint on September 2, 2025, against a garnishment notification from the Appenzeller Mittelland debt collection office dated August 22, 2025, in the context of a debt collection proceeding. The Higher Court of Appenzell Ausserrhoden, as the previous instance, did not admit the complaint with a decision on November 11, 2025. Against this decision, the complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court on December 4, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1273/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint in a Criminal Matter
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court had to deal with the complaint of A.________ against a decision of the single judge of the criminal chamber of the cantonal court of Valais, which declared the cantonal appeal inadmissible. The appeal concerned a decision of the Regional Office for the Bas-Valais, which had issued a non-prosecution order.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_625/2025: Decision on the Restoration of a Deadline
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.A., filed an objection against a penal order dated April 2, 2024, in which he was convicted of forgery and unlawful obtaining of a false determination. After withdrawing the objection, the Regional Court Jura bernois-Seeland declared the penal order valid on November 25, 2024. Later, A.A. requested the restoration of the deadline for the objection, which was denied by both the Regional Court on February 17, 2025, and the cantonal complaint chamber on June 3, 2025. A.A. then appealed to the Federal Court against this last decision.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_616/2025: Decision Regarding the Complaint Against the Denial of Conditional Release from a Measure
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced to three years and six months in prison for multiple offenses and to a measure under Art. 64 of the Penal Code. Several requests for conditional release have been denied in the past. In the complaint before the Federal Court, A.________ sought conditional release or, alternatively, the conversion of the measure.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_562/2025: Inadmissibility of Acquittal and Confirmation of the Conviction
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.A.________ and C.A.________ were convicted of qualified simple bodily injury and qualified acts of violence against minors with conditional prison sentences and fines. The previous instance confirmed the conviction. A.A.________ filed a complaint and requested his acquittal.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_1066/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint in a Family Law Matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, mother of the child C.________, demands in her complaint before the Federal Court, among other things, the immediate granting of sole custody, the withdrawal of the father's visitation rights, the repeal of the guardianship, and the granting of suspensive effect. The Higher Court of the canton of Aargau dismissed the corresponding complaint and pointed out the immediate enforceability of the family court's orders, as they serve the best interests of the child. The Federal Court decides that the complaint cannot be admitted, as the requirements according to Art. 93 para. 1 BGG and Art. 98 BGG are not met and no sufficient constitutional grievances have been raised.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_921/2025: Decision Regarding Maintenance Contributions for Children from a Non-Marital Relationship
Summary of the Facts
The father A.A.________ was ordered by the first-instance court of the canton of Geneva to pay monthly maintenance contributions for his two children B.A.________ and C.A.________. On appeal, the Chambre civile of the Cour de justice adjusted the father's visitation rights and newly determined the maintenance contributions based on a hypothetical income. The father filed a complaint with the Federal Court, challenging the determination of the hypothetical income and the amount of the maintenance contributions, as he considers his actual income to be lower.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_1099/2025: Non-admission of a Complaint Against an Interim Decision and a Ruling Regarding Wage Garnishment
Summary of the Facts
In the context of a wage garnishment, the complainant filed a complaint with the Higher Court of the canton of Bern against a garnishment notification dated August 22, 2025, in the context of a debt collection proceeding. The Higher Court, as the previous instance, did not admit the complaint with a decision on November 11, 2025. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court on December 4, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_388/2025: Judgment of the Federal Court Regarding Appeal for Bodily Harm and Sexual Violence
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ was convicted in first instance on June 27, 2024, by the District Court of Vaud for qualified bodily injury, defamation, insult, qualified threat, coercion, and rape. He received a total sentence of 30 months in prison, with 109 days of pre-trial detention credited. Additionally, a fine of 60 days at CHF 30 each as well as a fine of CHF 1,000 were imposed. Furthermore, his conditional sentence suspension from April 28, 2021, was revoked, an order to pay CHF 6,000 in damages for non-material damages to the victim was made, and his expulsion from Switzerland for five years was decided. A.A.________ appealed this judgment, which was rejected by the Criminal Court of the canton of Vaud on January 22, 2025. The complainant, a French citizen living in Switzerland, claims the right to visit his children and has a problematic history with multiple criminal convictions, including violence against his previous partner. On April 5, 2023, there was a situation in which he violently prevented his new partner from leaving the apartment.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1268/2025: Examination of the Legitimacy of the Extension of Pre-Trial Detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is being prosecuted in the canton of Ticino for multiple offenses, including fraud, embezzlement, and money laundering. He has been in pre-trial detention since his hearing on August 23, 2024, which has been extended multiple times. With the disputed cantonal decision, the detention was extended until November 22, 2025, which the complainant contests before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_927/2024: Judgment on the Criminal Liability of Insider Information According to Art. 154 FinfraG
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________, former Chief Operating Officer Europe of C.________ AG, was accused of having sold shares of C.________ AG on May 15, 2018, using insider information to avoid a loss of CHF 247,933.56. The previous instances acquitted him of the charge of exploiting insider information according to Art. 154 para. 1 lit. a FinfraG. The Federal Prosecutor's Office filed a complaint in criminal matters and requested that the complainant be found guilty and punished.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_521/2025: Judgment Regarding Tax Disputes Between a Company and the Tax Administration of the Canton of Geneva
Summary of the Facts
A company that acted as a consultant for a foreign investment fund was reassessed by the tax administration of the canton of Geneva for the tax periods 2010 to 2013, and was imposed with tax claims and fines. The administration found that fees for fund management and service fees were not declared correctly and that a legal construct had been created to enable significant tax evasion. The company disputed these findings and presented various pieces of evidence that it believed would refute the allegations.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_999/2025: Withdrawal of the Complaint in a Divorce Matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.A.________ filed a complaint on November 11, 2025, against a judgment of the Cour d'appel civile des Tribunal cantonal of the canton of Vaud dated October 9, 2025, regarding the liquidation of the marital property regime. After submitting a supplemental brief on November 13, 2025, she withdrew her complaint with a letter dated November 10, 2025, received by the Federal Court on December 19, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1124/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Due to Late Filing
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against a decision of the Criminal Review Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Vaud, which had declared two complaints against dismissal and non-prosecution decisions of the public prosecutor's office of the district of La Côte as inadmissible. The complainant also requested free legal aid and a restoration of the deadline.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_988/2025: Rejection of the Complaint Regarding the Dismissal Decision
Summary of the Facts
The company B.________ SA and A.________ filed a criminal complaint in 2015 for alleged breach of trust, fraud, and disloyal management. They requested between 2017 and 2021 from the central office of the public prosecutor's office of the canton of Valais an extension of the investigation against the suspects C.________ and D.________, which they deemed necessary. After several procedures, the cantonal court ordered an extension of the investigation in 2022. Nevertheless, the public prosecutor decided with a dismissal order in 2025 not to press charges against C.________ and D.________. The single judge of the Chambre pénale of the cantonal court confirmed this dismissal order, against which the complaint was filed with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_918/2025: Rejection of the Complaint Due to Withdrawal
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ had filed a complaint against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne dated November 10, 2025. With an undated submission received by the Federal Court on December 23, 2025, he withdrew the complaint.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_467/2025: Non-admission of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint against the judgment of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne (5V 24 123) dated July 14, 2025. The subject of the proceedings was disability insurance. In a letter dated November 28, 2025, the complainant withdrew the complaint filed on September 1, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_406/2025: Delivery of a Payment Order and Timely Filing of the Objection
Summary of the Facts
A.________ initiated a debt collection against B.________ for a claim of CHF 162,000. The debt collection office sent the payment order to B.________, who filed an objection in a timely manner, which, however, was not noted on the payment order. This led to the issuance of a bankruptcy warning and later the cancellation of these measures by the debt collection office. The District Court of St. Gallen overturned this decision of the debt collection office; however, the Cantonal Court confirmed the nullity of the enforcement measures.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1097/2025: Decision on the Non-Admission of a Complaint in Proceedings According to Art. 108 BGG
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a decision of the Higher Court of the canton of Bern, which rejected the initiation of a complaint proceeding. The Federal Court examines whether the complaint meets the legal justification requirements according to Art. 42 BGG and decides on the non-admission of the complaint as well as the imposition of costs.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_792/2025: Withdrawal of the Complaint in Divorce Proceedings (Liquidation of the Property Regime)
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint on September 15, 2025, against a decision of the Cour d'appel civile of the canton of Vaud dated July 21, 2025, regarding the liquidation of the property regime in connection with divorce proceedings between him and B.________. During the proceedings, the parties entered into a settlement procedure. Following the withdrawal of the complaint on December 18, 2025, the president of the II. civil law department of the Federal Court ordered the removal of the case from the register.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_1069/2025: Judgment Regarding the Imposition of Costs in Connection with a Bankruptcy Warning
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ GmbH was enforced for a claim of the tax administration of the canton of Appenzell amounting to CHF 492.50. After relocating to the canton of Zug, the debt collection office Cham issued a bankruptcy warning. The appeal against this was dismissed by the Higher Court of the canton of Zug, II. Complaint Department, in its capacity as supervisory authority over debt collection and bankruptcy. Due to malicious false claims, the previous instance imposed a decision fee of CHF 500 based on Art. 20a para. 2 no. 5 SchKG. The A.________ GmbH contested the imposition of costs before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_398/2025: Inadmissibility of the Challenge to the Cantonal Directive Regarding Property Tax Values and Imputed Rents
Summary of the Facts
The government council of the canton of Zurich issued a detailed directive on the valuation of properties and the determination of imputed rents, which is to come into effect in 2026. Three complainants, including the homeowners' association of canton Zurich, contested the directive as unlawful and approached the Federal Court after a decision of the Administrative Court of the canton of Zurich declaring non-admission, seeking to have the directive reviewed on the merits.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_508/2025: Distribution of the Proceeds from an Assignment Action According to Art. 260 SchKG
Summary of the Facts
A creditor (A.________) had outstanding claims of CHF 2,693,931.68 in the context of the bankruptcy of B.________ SA. The bankruptcy estate assigned claims against the organs of the company according to Art. 260 SchKG to various creditors, including A.________. In a subsequent legal dispute, the creditor was awarded claims plus interest, which, however, exceeded the original claim and generated a surplus. The bankruptcy administration demanded that A.________ return this surplus to the estate.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.