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 dispositive parts. 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 individually tailored to your areas of law.
1C_714/2025: Non-admission due to late filing of complaint
Summary of Facts
The subject of the dispute concerns the refusal to grant authorization for conducting a criminal investigation against employees of the city clerk's and debt collection office. The lower court, the High Court of the Canton of Zurich, refused the authorization in its decision of September 23, 2025. The Federal Court examined the timely submission of the complaint.
Summary of Considerations
The complainant filed a criminal complaint against several employees of the city clerk's and debt collection office. After the files were forwarded by the Public Prosecutor's Office of Zug and the Public Prosecutor's Office of Limmattal/Albis, the High Court of the Canton of Zurich decided to refuse the authorization. The complaint was filed with the Federal Court on November 26, 2025, which required an examination of its timeliness. According to Art. 44 para. 2 BGG, a judicial delivery in the event of an unsuccessful delivery attempt is regarded as having been made no later than seven days after the attempted delivery (delivery fiction). The delivery period began on October 4, 2025, and the complaint period ended on November 3, 2025, according to Art. 100 para. 1 BGG. Since the submission was made only in November, the complaint was late and was not admitted. No costs were imposed on the complainant.
Summary of Dispositive
The dispositive stated that the complaint would not be admitted and no costs would be incurred. The judgment will be delivered to the parties and the involved authorities.
4A_637/2024: Liability action against corporate bodies
Summary of Facts
The complainant A.________, former sole managing director of C.________ SA, was sued by the respondent B.________ SA for damages based on an assignment under Art. 260 SchKG. The damage is claimed to have been caused by the late filing of the bankruptcy of C.________ SA. The plaintiff was awarded damages of CHF 404,173.75. The lower court, the II Civil Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Ticino, dismissed A.________'s appeal and held that the first instance court had correctly relied on Art. 42 para. 2 OR in calculating the damages.
Summary of Considerations
**E. 1**: The complainant has correctly raised his claim in accordance with the provisions of federal case law; however, the subsidiary reference to the constitutional complaint is irrelevant, as the procedure is of a civil nature and the complaint in civil matters is 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 these 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 an assignee under Art. 260 SchKG is confirmed, as it has the right to assert rights of the bankruptcy estate. The complainant cannot successfully argue that the damage did not arise lawfully, 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 lower court is reaffirmed, as the damage had to be estimated due to unclear account documents. The complainant is accused of not having provided sufficient evidence for his claims and in particular of not having presented a plausible argument against the assessment of the evidence by the first instance court.
Summary of Dispositive
The complaint was dismissed, court costs were imposed, and a party compensation was determined. A delivery was made to the party representatives and the lower court.
2C_62/2025: Judgment on the blocking of a domain due to unapproved gambling
Summary of Facts
The A.________ SAS, a company based abroad, operates a platform for digital trading cards (NFT) and online games that allow for winnings under "A.________.com". The Intercantonal Gambling Supervision Authority Gespa ordered the blocking of the domain in Switzerland, as the online games offered are subject to approval. Complaints and objections against this were unsuccessful in the lower courts; A.________ SAS appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of Considerations
The Federal Court examined the admissibility requirements and found that the complaint was submitted in accordance with form and deadlines. The lower court is deemed to be inter-cantonal final instance, so the complaint is admissible. The request to directly lift the blocking order was not considered due to the devolutive effect. The Federal Court applies the law ex officio and focuses on the alleged defects unless there are obvious legal violations. The Gambling Act (BGS) requires the approval of certain gambling games to ensure their safety and non-profitability. Online games without the appropriate approval must be blocked. The complainant did not dispute the economic dependence between the sold digital trading cards and the online games. The Federal Court confirmed the lower court's conclusion that there is a monetary stake and a monetary win in the sense of Art. 3 lit. a BGS. Since the complainant did not possess a valid approval for its gambling activities, the Federal Court confirmed the legality of the domain's blocking.
Summary of Dispositive
The complaint is dismissed and the court costs are imposed on the complainant. The judgment will be delivered to the parties involved and the competent authorities.
5D_51/2025: Decision on the alleged denial of justice/delay of justice procedure
Summary of Facts
The complainant filed a complaint for denial of justice or delay of justice against the Cantonal Court of Lucerne. The background was a dispute regarding two motions for recusal against judges of the District Court of Kriens, which were partially dismissed. 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 Facts
A.________ Sàrl was declared bankrupt with immediate effect 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 provisional withdrawal of enforceability (effect of suspensive effect), which was, however, denied by the President of the cantonal court on October 10, 2025. A.________ Sàrl then 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 commercial register blocking
Summary of Facts
The procedure concerns a dispute over ownership and control of A.________ AG and B.________ AG. Both parties claim to be the 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 commercial register blocking. The Commercial Court rejected the requests of A.________ AG and instead granted the counter-request of the defendant, which established 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 phone facility outside the construction zone
Summary of Facts
Sunrise GmbH applied for the renovation of an existing mobile phone facility on a traffic area outside the construction zone in the municipality of Lüsslingen-Nennigkofen, which required an exception permit under Art. 24 RPG. The objections raised against this, including from A.________, were rejected by the cantonal and municipal authorities. A.________ appealed the decisions to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn, which dismissed the complaints. With a complaint in public law matters to the Federal Court, A.________ requested the annulment of the building permit and the referral of the case back to the lower courts.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7F_46/2025: Request for revision against a Federal Court judgment
Summary of Facts
The applicant A.________ requested the revision of the judgment of the Swiss Federal Court of July 15, 2025 (7B_415/2025). The Federal Court had not examined the complainant's appeal due to an obvious lack of reasoning. In the revision request, A.________ attempted to explain why the judgment should be reviewed.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_226/2025: Non-admission of the complaint
Summary of Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court after the High Court of the Canton of Thurgau dismissed her complaint against a decision on legal enforcement by the District Court of Frauenfeld. The subject of the dispute concerned the final legal enforcement.
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 matters
Summary of 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 prescribed number of floors and distance regulations. The local council granted a building permit in 2020 as well as the exception permits. Neighbors raised objections, which were ultimately dismissed by both the local council and later by the Administrative Court. The government council revoked the permits, whereupon the Administrative Court upheld the builder's complaint. The complainants appealed to 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 Facts
The complainant, an Iranian national, has been staying in Switzerland since 1986 due to an asylum application. He received a settlement permit as part of a marriage to a Swiss citizen, which was later revoked due to commercial fraud against 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 reissuance of a residence permit – Non-admission due to obvious inadmissibility
Summary of Facts
The Kosovo national A.________, originally in possession of an EU/EFTA residence permit, which was lawfully revoked, applied for the reissuance 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 matters with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_514/2025: Judgment on the non-renewal of the residence permit and expulsion
Summary of 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 refused to renew 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 matters with the Federal Court, which examined his request 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 Facts
The A.________ AG, as the second-placed bidder in the tendering process of the municipality of St. Moritz for electrical installations, objected to the award to the ARGE B.________ due to violations by the member D.________ AG against the provisions of the collective labor agreement. After an initial dismissal by the Federal Court, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden conducted additional fact-finding and again dismissed the complaint. It argued that the company D.________ AG had no knowledge of the later established violations at the time of the award. The A.________ AG filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint to the Federal Court, which classified the award as illegal.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_42/2025: Judgment regarding property settlement and cost consequences in divorce
Summary of Facts
The parties, A.________ (complainant) and B.________ (respondent), divorced after 20 years of marriage. The District Court of Zurich regulated the ancillary consequences of the divorce, including property claims, adult maintenance, and post-marital maintenance. A.________ challenged the partial regulations, whereby the High Court of the Canton of Zurich reduced the post-marital maintenance and dismissed the other points of the appeal. With the present complaint, A.________ questioned the property settlement as well as 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 Kosovo national after divorce
Summary of Facts
The Kosovo 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.________ subsequently 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 with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_864/2025: Decision on the non-admission order and non-admission of a complaint
Summary of Facts
The Federal Court examined a criminal complaint against the non-admission order of the Regional Public Prosecutor's Office of Bern-Mittelland and the related decision of the High Court of the Canton of Bern. The complaint was deemed manifestly inadmissible, as the conditions for standing were not met and no formal objections were raised. The applicant's request for legal aid was also dismissed.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_207/2025: Judgment regarding the challenge of a discretionary assessment
Summary of Facts
The A.________ AG (formerly B.________ AG) was in dispute with the cantonal tax office of Zurich regarding the discretionary assessment 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 Zurich tax office made a discretionary assessment, which was challenged by the company as null and void. The lower courts rejected 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 by the Zurich tax office.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_365/2025: Serious bodily injury by negligence
Summary of Facts
On February 22, 2018, the employee C.________ sustained serious injuries in a work accident at A.________'s vineyard, which led to the amputation of his right arm and part of his ear. The accident occurred while working 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 ownership and classification in the breed type list II in the Canton of Zurich
Summary of 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 ownership is prohibited in the Canton of Zurich. The cantonal veterinary office ordered the definitive confiscation of the dog, unless A.________ rehomed the dog or relocated within the stipulated time. A.________ contested this before the Federal Court, claiming 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 motion for recusal
Summary of Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint and a subsequent supplementary request against B.________, who is a case worker with prosecutorial powers. He also requested her recusal. The Prosecutorial Chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen combined these procedures and refused the authorization for prosecution as well as the handling of the recusal request.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_79/2025: Judgment regarding study period extension and file access under the Disability Equality Act
Summary of Facts
The complainant, A.________, suffers from cognitive impairments after a traumatic brain injury and has been enrolled in the Master's program in Environmental Sciences at ETH Zurich since 2019. After reaching the maximum study period, he requested an extension of three and a half years under the Disability Equality Act (BehiG). ETH Zurich granted him an extension of two semesters and set conditions for further extensions. Additionally, A.________ requested access to files from previous procedures, which was denied. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed ETH Zurich's decision regarding the study period extension and dismissed the request for file access.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_334/2025: Causal connection in an accident with shoulder injuries
Summary of Facts
The respondent, A.________, suffered a workplace accident on September 23, 2021, when he fell on his right shoulder and back, sustaining contusions. The Swiss Accident Insurance (CNA) recognized benefits until June 5, 2022, but later denied further payments on the grounds that the health complaints were no longer in a natural causal relationship to the accident. Following a judicial expert report, the lower court granted the respondent benefits until September 21, 2024. CNA filed a complaint against this.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_866/2025: Judgment regarding non-admission in criminal proceedings
Summary of Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against two non-admission orders of the District Attorney's Office of the District of Pfäffikon, which were dismissed by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich on August 22, 2025. The complainant then filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8F_17/2025: Non-admission of a revision request regarding unemployment insurance
Summary of Facts
A.________ filed a revision request with the Federal Court against its judgment of September 19, 2025 (8C_495/2025), regarding unemployment insurance. The applicant was asked to pay an advance of CHF 500, but failed to do so within the original deadline or within a granted extension.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_991/2025: Inadmissibility of a late complaint against a non-admission order
Summary of Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with 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-admission of a criminal proceeding by the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Zug. However, the complainant's complaint was submitted late, leading to non-admission.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_713/2025: Decision regarding authorization procedure
Summary of Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint against B.________, a former prosecutor, as well as against employees of the Cantonal Police of St. Gallen. He accused them of arbitrariness, racism, and abuse of office. The Prosecutorial Chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen refused the authorization to initiate criminal proceedings.
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 Facts
The landowner A.________ opposes a road construction project of 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 lower courts, including the High Court of the Canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden, dismissed the complaint. A.________ contested this before the Federal Court with a complaint in public law matters.
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 Facts
The complainant A.________ had filed a supervisory complaint against lawyer B.________ with the Lawyers' Commission 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 dealt with, as she had no party rights as the complainant and was therefore not legitimized. After she refused to pay her cost advance and eventually withdrew the complaint, the Administrative Court dismissed the procedure as completed without imposing procedural costs. The complainant appealed this decision to 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 Facts
The 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 civil complaint with the Federal Court, aiming to refer the case back to the lower court for re-examination and to suspend the execution of the bankruptcy decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_910/2025: Decision regarding alleged denial of justice/delay of justice by the Cantonal Court of Lucerne in connection with a motion for recusal
Summary of Facts
The complainant was involved in several debt collection proceedings by B.________ AG and filed a lawsuit and complaint before the District Court of Kriens, led by two district judges. A motion for recusal against the district judges was dismissed. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Lucerne, alleging denial of justice and delay of justice. 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-admission of a complaint against an arbitration decision of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS)
Summary of Facts
A professional football club filed a complaint against an arbitration decision of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS), which confirmed a prior decision of the Players' Status Chamber of FIFA. The complaint was deemed manifestly inadmissible by the Federal Court, as it was not submitted within the deadline.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_510/2025: Non-admission of a complaint regarding a revision request
Summary of Facts
The complainant challenges a decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne from August 22, 2025, in which a revision request was dismissed. The Federal Court examined the admissibility of the complaint and decided not to admit it due to 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 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 debts, and ongoing social welfare benefits, his settlement permit was revoked and replaced by a residence permit. A.________ cited health problems and contested the downgrade by the Office for Migration and Integration of the Canton of Aargau as well as the lower court's dismissal of his complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_678/2025: Judgment regarding the complaint concerning precautionary measures in the area of unemployment insurance
Summary of Facts
The complainant requested precautionary measures in the previous delay of justice complaint procedure regarding the review of her claim for unemployment compensation. The cantonal court dismissed the request, as the complainant had not fulfilled her duty to cooperate, the urgency was self-inflicted, and thus no super-provisional measures appeared necessary.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_687/2025: Judgment regarding the voting complaint on the popular initiatives
Summary of Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a voting complaint with the government council of the Canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden regarding the popular votes on November 30, 2025, on two popular initiatives. She requested the cancellation of the votes or the annulment of the voting results. The government council dismissed her complaint, to the extent it considered 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 on the downgrade of a residence permit to a settlement permit
Summary of Facts
A.________, a national of B.________ who has lived in Switzerland since 1990, held a settlement permit, which was revoked by the Migration Service of the Canton of Neuchâtel and replaced by a residence permit due to his long-standing and significant dependence on social welfare (over CHF 382,000 in debts). The complainant unsuccessfully sought to maintain his settlement permit without conditions and filed a complaint against the downgrade of this permit with the Federal Court until the end.
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-admission)
Summary of Facts
The complainant intended to make structural adjustments to a parcel in the agricultural zone of the municipality of Seewis in Prättigau. The original building permit was granted on December 4, 2020. Unauthorized construction work led to a stop order. Repeated inspections and correspondence took place. The municipal council of Seewis rejected the approval of the modified construction projects and ordered the restoration of the lawful state. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden dismissed the builder's complaint against this decision. The complainant then turned to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_242/2025: Complaint regarding the refusal of a declaratory decision and access to files by ETH Zurich
Summary of Facts
A.________, now excluded from the Master's program, requested a declaratory decision on specific questions regarding organizational and study-related aspects at ETH Zurich, as well as access to files from previous procedures.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.