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 provide 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 of March 7, 2023, and July 13, 2023, as well as a decision of the Criminal Appeal Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Canton of Bern from March 12, 2024. 2. (E.2) The Criminal Appeal Chamber rejected 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 penal 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 supreme instances or the Federal Criminal Court. The present submission does not meet this requirement. Moreover, a comprehensible and legally relevant justification to challenge the contested decisions is missing. The generalized accusations of the complainant do not meet the requirements for the motivation of the complaint according to Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG. 4. (E.7) The Court finds that neither the relevant decisions nor the cited facts fulfill the requirements of first instance obligation, and a legally sufficient justification is lacking. Therefore, there is no need to examine further possible objections such as missed deadlines or irregular deliveries. 5. (E.8-9) The complaint is not to be admitted due to the 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 relevant parties.
7B_917/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against Non-admission Decision
Summary of the Facts
The complainant submitted a complaint against a non-admission decision of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Solothurn from July 1, 2025, to the High Court of the Canton of Solothurn, which rejected the complaint on August 21, 2025. He then 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 in the sense of Art. 81 para. 1 lit. b no. 5 BGG that would legitimize him to file a complaint. Furthermore, the submission contains no formal objections that could be examined separately from the matter. Due to insufficient justification, the complaint is not admitted 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 aid is rejected as the complaint was assessed as hopeless and the alleged need was not substantiated despite requests.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Court did not admit the complaint, rejected the request for free legal aid, 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 a sporting successor of a former club C.________ for an outstanding payment of €2,450,000 from 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 for the annulment of the arbitral award and the determination of the TAS's jurisdiction.
Summary of the Considerations
- E.1: Determination of the procedural language 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 route in international arbitration proceedings is admissible according to Art. 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 apply. 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 Federal Court's review to the appeal grounds exhaustively listed in Art. 190 para. 2 LDIP. Requirements for the precision of argumentation in the complaint are heightened; appellate criticism is inadmissible. E.5: E.5.1: The complainant argued 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 the 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 to be contractually bound by the arbitration clause. E.5.5: The Federal Court confirmed the careful examination by the arbitrators and pointed out that the complainant's argumentation was neither normatively nor legally sufficient to establish the jurisdiction of the TAS. E.6: The complainant asserted a violation of his right to be heard (Art. 190 para. 2 lit. d LDIP). The Federal Court denied this allegation, as the arbitrators had considered the relevant arguments, even if 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 bankruptcy declaration confirmed by the High Court of the Canton of Ticino (Chamber for Debt Collection and Bankruptcy). This had been requested by the cantonal compensation fund AVS/AI/IPG after the debtor was unable to demonstrate her solvency sufficiently, despite settling part of her liabilities.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_113/2025: Judgment on the Joint Storage of Weapons in a Household
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ requested the police of the Canton of Solothurn to allow the joint storage of weapons belonging to him and his son, both of whom hold the necessary weapons permits. The request was denied by the police command of the Canton of Solothurn. The complaint to the cantonal authorities, including the Administrative Court of Solothurn, was also unsuccessful. A.A.________ challenged the matter before the Federal Court and requested the joint storage of weapons and ammunition.
Full 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 decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, which did not admit 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.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1010/2025: Decision on the Non-admittance Issue 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 a proceeding regarding the circumstances of his mother B.A.________'s death. The court of first instance, the High Court of the Canton of Aargau, did not admit the complaint on September 8, 2025. The complainant then requested the Federal Court on September 29, 2025, to review this decision.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_872/2025: Recusal Request 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 review of documents during an ongoing sealing period. The High Court of the Canton of Aargau rejected the recusal request.
Full 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 submitted a complaint against the non-admission decision of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Rheinfelden-Laufenburg from September 1, 2025. The High Court of the Canton of Aargau did not admit the complaint with a decision of October 15, 2025. The complainant subsequently filed a complaint in criminal matters to the Federal Court.
Full 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, seeks the revision of an arbitral award from the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS) dated August 8, 2019. In the present procedure, the defendant sports agent had previously been convicted of forgery and fraud in criminal proceedings for submitting forged documents to the TAS to claim an unjustified commission. The plaintiff requests the declaration of nullity or annulment of the original arbitral award.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_893/2025: Procedure Regarding Suspending Effect in Connection with a Seizure Document
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed several complaints against a seizure document as well as other procedural actions in the context of debt collection. The lower courts partly did not admit her complaints or dismissed them. The complainant lastly filed a complaint against the decision of the High Court of the Canton of Zurich, which did not admit a request for suspending effect. In the subsequent procedure before the Federal Court, the complainant did not pay the required cost advance, resulting in the termination of the procedure due to non-admission.
Full 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. In this decision, the appeal filed by A.________ against a decision of the district judge of the District of Saane from May 13, 2025, which declared the objection against a penal order of December 16, 2024, as inadmissible due to lateness, was dismissed. A.________ requested that his objection be recognized as admissible.
Full 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 at the Grosshof penitentiary on suspicion of robbery. Due to a psychotic condition, he was temporarily transferred to the Lucerne Psychiatry (LUPS). After being returned to the detention facility, he was placed by the facility management as a special security measure in a security cell. 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 inhumane and disproportionate treatment.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_230/2025: Competence of the TAS Regarding the Application of FIFA Regulations on Deadline Compliance for Claims
Summary of the Facts
A Spanish professional football club (A.________) sues 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 appeal to the Federal Court.
Full 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 rejected by the District Court of Zurich and subsequently by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich. A.________ appeals these decisions to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_669/2025: Withdrawal of Driving License Due to an Offense Abroad
Summary of the Facts
The Motor Vehicle Control 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 illegal 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 before the Federal Court, among other things, the annulment of the judgment and the inclusion of the complete records of the Serbian criminal proceedings.
Full 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 filed a complaint to the Federal Court. He alleged denial of justice and requested the annulment of the decision of the High Court of the Canton of Aargau, which did not admit or rejected a complaint for denial of justice. The dispute was, among other things, the justification of a decision of the District Court of Brugg in the context of a civil procedure.
Full 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 of imprisonment for illegal activities. The Federal Office of Justice (OFJ) approved the extradition to France on June 17, 2025. A.________ appealed citing political offense, which was rejected by the lower instance, the appellate chamber of the Federal Criminal Court. He then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_683/2025: Decision Regarding the Approval of a Short-Stay Permit
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, a Cameroonian, applied for a short-stay permit based on Art. 21 para. 3 LEI after his asylum requests were rejected and a legally valid deportation decision was issued. Despite his graduation in Switzerland, the competent office rejected his requests, referencing the exclusivity of the asylum procedure. The complainant appealed to various courts, all of which dismissed his complaints.
Full 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 Seizure Execution
Summary of the Facts
In the context of a debt collection proceeding of the Canton of Basel-Stadt against A.B.________, the debt collection office Mendrisio issued a loss certificate of 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 was submitted against the actions of the debt collection office on October 9, 2025, on October 22, 2025. It classified the complainant's submissions as insufficient, unfounded, or irrelevant, and particularly rejected the complaint regarding the incorrect spelling of the complainant's name in the debt collection records as unfounded.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_682/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against the Material Assessment of Intellectual or Physical Abilities
Summary of the Facts
A.________'s failed maturity exam from August/September 2025 led to a complaint procedure 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 aid, 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.
Full 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 for family reunification to live with his wife and son in Switzerland. The competent migration office refused the permit, citing indications of a sham marriage and insufficient financial resources. The Cantonal Court of Fribourg confirmed the refusal and the rejection of the request for free legal aid.
Full 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 against B.________ in 2021 for alleged abuse of assets. The case involves financial transactions and a verbal 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 appeal chamber.
Full 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 consumption (Art. 19a para. 1 BetmG). The lower court imposed a sentence of 16 months (partially suspended) and a fine of 500 francs, confirmed the seizure of assets and ordered a substitute claim, and maintained the arrest on part of his assets. The complainant particularly contested the severity of the penalty, the substitute claim, and the continued existence of the arrest.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_272/2025: Unsealing of Data Carriers in a Criminal Procedure
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. It suspects him 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 rejection of the request and the exclusion of certain data. On February 21, 2025, the coercive measures court ordered the unsealing, against which A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.