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 remaining 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.
1C_714/2025: Non-admittance due to late filing of complaint
Summary of the Facts
The subject of the dispute concerns the refusal to grant authorization for conducting a criminal investigation against employees of the city clerk and enforcement office. The lower court, the Cantonal Court of Zurich, refused the authorization in its ruling of September 23, 2025. The Federal Court examined the timely submission of the complaint.
Summary of the Considerations
The complainant filed a criminal complaint against several employees of the city clerk and enforcement office. After the files were forwarded by the public prosecutor's office of Zug and the public prosecutor's office of Limmattal/Albis, the Cantonal Court of Zurich decided to refuse the authorization. The complaint was submitted to the Federal Court on November 26, 2025, thus its timeliness had to be examined. According to Article 44 Para. 2 BGG, a judicial delivery is deemed to have occurred in the event of an unsuccessful delivery attempt at the latest after seven days (fiction of delivery). The delivery period began on October 4, 2025, and the complaint period ended according to Article 100 Para. 1 BGG on November 3, 2025. Since the submission occurred only in November, the complaint was late, and it was not admitted. No costs were imposed on the complainant.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The dispositive stated that the complaint would not be admitted, and no costs would be charged. The judgment will be served to the parties and the involved authorities.
4A_637/2024: Liability action against corporate bodies
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 pursuant to Article 260 SchKG. The damage is alleged to have resulted from 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 found that the first instance court had correctly based its damage calculation on Article 42 Para. 2 OR.
Summary of the Considerations
**E. 1**: The complainant has correctly raised his claim in accordance with the provisions of federal jurisprudence, however, the subsidiary reference to the constitutional complaint is disregarded, as the procedure is of civil nature and complaints in civil matters are generally allowed. **E. 2.1 to E. 2.2**: The Federal Court applies federal law ex officio (Article 106 Para. 1 BGG), but examines violations of fundamental rights only if they are sufficiently justified (Article 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 Article 260 SchKG is confirmed, as they have the right to assert claims of the bankruptcy estate. The complainant cannot successfully argue that the damage was not legally 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 Article 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 providing sufficient evidence for his claims and particularly not presenting a plausible argument against the assessment of evidence by the first instance court.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The complaint was dismissed, court costs were imposed, and a party compensation was established. A delivery was made to the party representatives and the lower court.
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 that allow winnings under "A.________.com". The Inter-cantonal Gambling Supervision Authority Gespa ordered the blocking of the domain in Switzerland, as the offered online games require authorization. Complaints and objections against this were unsuccessful in the lower courts; A.________ SAS filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examined the admissibility requirements and found that the complaint was submitted in a timely and proper manner. The lower court is considered inter-cantonal and final, making the complaint admissible. The request to directly overturn 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 legal violations exist. The Gambling Act (BGS) requires the authorization of certain gambling activities to ensure their safety and public benefit. Online games without the appropriate authorization must be blocked. The complainant did not dispute the economic dependency between the sold digital trading cards and the online games. The Federal Court confirmed the lower court's view that a monetary stake and a monetary gain exist in the sense of Article 3 lit. a BGS. Since the complainant did not have a valid authorization for their gambling activities, the Federal Court confirmed the legality of the domain blocking.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The complaint is dismissed, and the court costs are imposed on the complainant. The judgment will be served to the participants in the proceedings and the competent authorities.
5D_51/2025: Decision on alleged denial of justice/delay in justice proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint for denial of justice or delay in justice against the Cantonal Court of Lucerne. The background was a dispute regarding two requests 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 the Facts
A.________ Sàrl was declared bankrupt with immediate effect by the decision of the President of the District Court of La Côte on October 3, 2025. Against this decision, A.________ Sàrl filed a complaint with the cantonal court on October 9, 2025, requesting provisional suspension of enforceability (effect of suspensive effect), which was rejected 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 relating to the blocking of the commercial register
Summary of the Facts
The proceedings concern a dispute over 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 commercial register blocking. The Commercial Court rejected the requests of A.________ AG and instead granted the counter-request of the defendant, establishing commercial register blocks in favor of their 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 building zone
Summary of the Facts
Sunrise GmbH applied for the renovation of an existing mobile phone facility on a traffic area outside the building zone in the municipality of Lüsslingen-Nennigkofen, which required an exemption permit according to Article 24 RPG. The objections raised against this, including from A.________, were dismissed 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 remittance of the case 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 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 had not admitted the applicant's complaint 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-admittance of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant turned to the Federal Court with a complaint after the Cantonal Court of Thurgau dismissed her complaint against a decision on legal opening by the District Court of Frauenfeld. The subject of the dispute concerned the definitive legal opening.
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 the Facts
E.________ applied for a building permit in 2019 for the new construction of a two-family house in Sachseln, deviating from the prescribed number of floors and distance regulations. The local council granted a building permit as well as the exemption permits in 2020. Neighbors raised objections, which were ultimately dismissed by the local council and later by the Administrative Court. The cantonal government revoked the permits, whereupon the Administrative Court upheld the builder's complaint. The complainants then turned 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 the Facts
The complainant, an Iranian national, has been 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 professional 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 in 2023 for a residence permit based on hardship, which was denied.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_685/2025: Decision on the reissuance of a residence permit – Non-admittance due to obvious inadmissibility
Summary of the Facts
The Kosovo national A.________, originally in possession of a residence permit EU/EFTA, which was legally 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 dismissed 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 the Facts
The Turkish national A.________ entered Switzerland in 2023 after marrying a local woman in 2022. The marriage was separated on December 1, 2023. The migration office of the canton of Solothurn refused to extend 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 application for a residence permit.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2D_10/2024: Illegality of an award due to public procurement
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG, as the second-placed bidder in the procurement process of the municipality of St. Moritz for electrical installations, 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 referral by the Federal Court, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden conducted further factual investigations and again dismissed the complaint. It argued that 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 rights 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 divorce ancillary issues, including property rights, adult support, and post-marital support. A.________ contested the partial regulations, while the Cantonal Court of Zurich reduced the post-marital support and dismissed the other points of the appeal. With the present complaint, A.________ questioned the division of property rights 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 Kosovo national after divorce
Summary of the Facts
The Kosovo national A.________ lived in Switzerland since 2019 after marrying a Slovenian national and had 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 appealed 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 the non-admittance of a complaint
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court examined a criminal complaint directed against the non-admittance decision of the Regional Public Prosecutor's Office of Bern-Mittelland and the related decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern. The complaint was deemed obviously inadmissible as the requirements for legal standing were not met, and no formal objections were raised. The complainant'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 the challenge of a discretionary assessment
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG (formerly B.________ AG) disputed a discretionary assessment from the cantonal tax office of Zurich for the tax period 2021. The company had not submitted a timely tax declaration 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 contested by the company as null and void. The lower courts dismissed the objection due to late justification and further legal prerequisites. The point of contention before the Federal Court was the question of the invalidity of the discretionary assessment by the tax office of Zurich.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_365/2025: Serious bodily injury due to negligence
Summary of the Facts
On February 22, 2018, the employee C.________ suffered severe injuries in a workplace accident on the vineyard of A.________, resulting in an amputation of the right arm and part of the auricle. The accident occurred while working with a prototype forestry machine, whose safety devices had been removed. A.________ and B.________ were convicted for serious bodily injury due to negligence.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_436/2023: Decision regarding dog ownership and classification in breed type list II in the Canton of Zurich
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ holds 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 seizure of the dog unless A.________ rehomed the dog or moved within the deadline. A.________ contested this up to 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 proceedings and request for recusal
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint and a subsequent supplemental request against B.________, a caseworker with prosecutorial powers. He also requested her recusal. The indictment chamber of the canton of St. Gallen combined these proceedings and refused the authorization for criminal 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 extension of study time and access to files under the Disability Equality Act
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, suffers from cognitive impairments following 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 applied for an extension of three and a half years under the Disability Equality Act (BehiG). ETH Zurich granted him a study extension of two semesters and set conditions for a further extension. Furthermore, A.________ requested access to files from earlier proceedings, which was denied. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed ETH Zurich's decision regarding the study 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 workplace accident on September 23, 2021, during which he fell on his right shoulder and back, sustaining contusions. The Swiss Accident Insurance (CNA) recognized benefits until June 5, 2022, but refused further payment on the grounds that the health complaints were no longer in a natural causal relationship to the accident afterwards. Following a court expert opinion, the lower court nonetheless awarded benefits to the complainant until September 21, 2024. The CNA appealed against this.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_866/2025: Judgment on non-admittance in criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against two non-admittance decisions of the Statthalteramt of the district of Pfäffikon, which were dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Zurich on August 22, 2025. The complainant then filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8F_17/2025: Non-admittance 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) regarding unemployment insurance. The applicant was asked to pay a deposit of CHF 500, but he neither made this payment within the original deadline nor 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-admittance decision
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Zug, I. Complaint Division, dated August 19, 2025. This decision concerned the non-admittance 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-admittance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_713/2025: Decision regarding authorization proceedings
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 indictment chamber of the canton of St. Gallen refused to authorize the opening of a criminal procedure.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_310/2025: Judgment on the complaint against a road construction project involving expropriations
Summary of the Facts
The property owner A.________ opposes a road construction project for the cantonal road No. 55 in the municipality of Wolfhalden, which involves renovation and expansion works and is associated with expropriations as well as temporary claims on her parcel. The lower courts, including the Cantonal Court 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 closure of proceedings due to withdrawal
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ had submitted a supervisory complaint against lawyer B.________ to the Lawyers’ Commission of the Canton of Aargau, which was dismissed as unfounded. Her subsequent complaint to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau was not substantively dealt with, as she, as the complainant, had no party rights and was therefore not legitimized. After she did not want to pay her cost advance and ultimately withdrew the complaint, the Administrative Court closed the proceedings 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 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 was dismissed by the cantonal appeal authority, A.________ SA in liquidation filed a complaint in civil matters with the Federal Court, aiming to remit the case for reassessment to the lower court 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 by the Cantonal Court of Lucerne in connection with a recusal request
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was involved in several enforcement actions initiated by B.________ AG and filed lawsuits and complaints before the District Court of Kriens, presided over by two district judges. A request for recusal against the district judges was dismissed. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Lucerne and claimed denial of justice and delay before the Federal Court. The Cantonal Court has since decided on the complaint, thus rendering the federal court proceedings moot.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_556/2025: Non-admittance of a complaint against an arbitral award of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS)
Summary of the Facts
A professional football club filed a complaint against an arbitral award of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS), which confirmed a previous decision of the Players' Status Chamber of FIFA. The complaint was deemed obviously inadmissible by the Federal Court as it was not submitted in a timely manner.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_510/2025: Non-admittance of a complaint regarding a revision request
Summary of the Facts
The complainant criticizes a decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne dated 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 the lack of timely and sufficient justification.
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 reliance, his settlement permit was revoked and replaced with a residence permit. A.________ cited health issues and contested the downgrade by the Office for Migration and Integration of the Canton of Aargau as well as the rejection of his complaint by 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 proceedings for delay regarding the review of her claim for unemployment compensation. The cantonal court dismissed the request because 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 on the voting complaint regarding 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 requested the cancellation of the votes or the annulment of the voting results. The government council dismissed her complaint as far as it was admitted 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 downgrading of a residence permit to a settlement permit
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a national of B.________, has lived in Switzerland since 1990 and held a settlement permit, which was revoked and replaced with a residence permit due to his long-term and significant dependence on social assistance (over CHF 382,000 in debt) by the Migration Service of the Canton of Neuchâtel. The complainant unsuccessfully sought to maintain his settlement permit unconditionally and filed a complaint against the downgrade of this permit up to 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 building zone (non-admittance)
Summary of the 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 issued 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 follow-up approval of the amended building projects 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 turned to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_242/2025: Complaint against the refusal of a declaratory decision and access to files by ETH Zurich
Summary of the 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 and access to files from previous proceedings.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.