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 portal of Lexplorer. There, you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your legal areas.
6B_913/2025: Inadmissibility of an appeal in a criminal matter: Violation of the LCR
Summary of Facts
The appellant approached the Federal Court with an appeal against several decisions regarding alleged violations of the Road Traffic Act, including an “alcohol affair” and an “affair over 20 km/h.” He complained, among other things, about 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 Considerations
1. (E.1) The appeal concerns, among other things, judgments of March 7, 2023, and July 13, 2023, as well as a decision of the Criminal Appeals Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Canton of Bern from March 12, 2024. 2. (E.2) The Criminal Appeals Chamber rejected an appeal against the decision of the Regional Court Jura bernois-Seeland of October 20, 2023, which found the late submission of an objection to a penalty order. 3. (E.3-6) The Federal Court reminds that according to Art. 80 para. 1 BGG, appeals are only permissible against decisions of cantonal final instances or the Federal Criminal Court. The present submission does not meet this requirement. In addition, there is a lack of a comprehensible and legally relevant justification to challenge the contested decisions. The generalized accusations of the appellant do not meet the requirements for the motivation of the appeal according to Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG. 4. (E.7) The Court finds that neither the contested decisions nor the stated facts meet the requirements for the obligation of the first instance, and a legally sufficient justification is lacking. It is therefore unnecessary to examine further possible objections such as missed deadlines or irregular deliveries. 5. (E.8-9) The appeal is not to be upheld due to its clear inadmissibility in the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 BGG.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The appeal was declared inadmissible, court costs were not imposed, and the decision was communicated to the relevant parties.
7B_917/2025: Inadmissibility of the appeal against the non-admission order
Summary of Facts
The appellant submitted an appeal against a non-admission order of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Solothurn dated July 1, 2025, to the Higher Court of the Canton of Solothurn, which rejected the appeal on August 21, 2025. He then filed a criminal appeal against this decision to the Federal Court.
Summary of Considerations
The appeal does not meet the requirements for justification according to Art. 42 para. 2 and Art. 106 para. 2 BGG. In particular, the appellant does not present a civil claim within the meaning of Art. 81 para. 1 lit. b no. 5 BGG that would legitimize him to appeal. Furthermore, the submission does not contain formal complaints that could be examined separately from the matter. Due to insufficient justification, the appeal is not admitted in the simplified procedure (Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b and para. 3 BGG). The court costs are imposed on the appellant due to the loss (Art. 66 para. 1 BGG). The application for free legal assistance is rejected as the appeal was deemed hopeless and the claimed need was not substantiated despite the request.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The Federal Court did not admit the appeal, rejected the application for free legal assistance, and imposed the court costs on the appellant.
4A_180/2025: Decision regarding the jurisdiction of the court in an international sports arbitration case
Summary of Facts
The appellant (an Argentine player agent) filed a claim before the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS), arguing that the respondent (an Italian football club B.________) is liable as the sporting successor of a previous club C.________ for the outstanding payment of EUR 2,450,000 from a commission contract. On March 7, 2025, the TAS declared itself not competent to adjudicate the dispute. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Court for the annulment of the arbitration award and for the determination of the jurisdiction of the TAS.
Summary of 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 that language. E.2: The appeal route in international arbitration proceedings is permissible 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 are applicable. E.3: Examination of the admissibility criteria of the appeal. There are no obstacles to the appeal, subject to the examination of its justification. E.4: Limitation of the review by the Federal Court to the appeal grounds conclusively listed in Art. 190 para. 2 LDIP. Requirements for precision in arguments in the appeal are heightened; appellate criticism is inadmissible. E.5: E.5.1: The appellant complained 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 term sporting succession is not known in Swiss law or in the Code of Obligations and is therefore not suitable to establish jurisdiction. Moreover, the respondent did not show any 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 appellant's argumentation was neither normatively nor legally sufficiently justified to establish the jurisdiction of the TAS. E.6: The appellant claimed 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 reached a different assessment.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The appeal was rejected, and the court costs as well as a party compensation were imposed on the appellant.
5A_971/2025: Inadmissibility of the appeal
Summary of Facts
The Federal Court examined an appeal by A.________ Sagl in liquidation against the bankruptcy order confirmed by the Higher Court of the Canton of Ticino (Chamber for Debt Collection and Bankruptcy). This was based on a request from the cantonal compensation fund AVS/AI/IPG after the debtor could not sufficiently prove her solvency, despite having settled part of her liabilities.
Complete 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 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 gun ownership permits. The request was denied by the Police Command of the Canton of Solothurn. The appeal to the cantonal authorities, including the Administrative Court of Solothurn, was also unsuccessful. A.A.________ challenged the matter before the Federal Court, requesting the joint storage of weapons and ammunition.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_504/2025: Measures under the Protection Against Violence Act
Summary of Facts
A.________ filed an appeal against a decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, which did not admit his appeal against a decision of the District Court of Zurich because the appeal was submitted late. The Federal Court examined the appeal against the decision of the Administrative Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1010/2025: Decision on the issue of non-admission regarding an appeal about case dismissal
Summary of Facts
The appellant, A.A.________, filed an appeal against the dismissal order of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Baden dated August 15, 2025, which had dismissed a procedure regarding the circumstances of his mother B.A.________'s death. The previous instance, the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau, did not admit the appeal on September 8, 2025. The appellant then requested the Federal Court to review this decision on September 29, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_872/2025: Request for recusal in a criminal matter
Summary of 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.________, suspecting him of bias, particularly due to access to documents during an ongoing sealing period. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau rejected the recusal request.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1128/2025: Inadmissibility of an appeal in criminal matters
Summary of Facts
The appellant filed an appeal against the non-admission order of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Rheinfelden-Laufenburg dated September 1, 2025. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau did not admit the appeal with a decision dated October 15, 2025. The appellant then filed a criminal appeal with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_268/2025: Revision of an international sports arbitration case
Summary of Facts
The plaintiff, a professional football player, demands the revision of an arbitration award from the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS) dated August 8, 2019. In the present proceedings, the defendant player agent was previously convicted criminally for forgery and fraud for having presented forged documents to the TAS in order to claim an unjustified commission. The plaintiff requests a declaration of nullity or the annulment of the original arbitration award.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_893/2025: Proceedings regarding suspensive effect in connection with a seizure document
Summary of Facts
The appellant filed several appeals against a seizure document as well as other procedural actions in the context of debt collection. The previous instances partially did not admit her appeals or rejected them. The appellant finally submitted an appeal against the decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich, which did not admit a request for suspensive effect. In the subsequent proceedings before the Federal Court, the appellant did not pay the required cost advance, which led to the termination of the proceedings due to non-admission.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_871/2025: Inadmissibility of an appeal in criminal matters due to insufficient justification
Summary of Facts
A.________ filed an appeal on October 25, 2025, against the decision of the Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Fribourg dated September 4, 2025. In this decision, the appeal filed by A.________ against a decision of the district judge of the district of Saane dated May 13, 2025, which declared the objection to a penalty order of December 16, 2024, due to lateness inadmissible, was rejected. A.________ requested that his objection be recognized as admissible.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_530/2023: Judgment on special security measures in pre-trial detention
Summary of Facts
A.________ was in pre-trial detention at the Grosshof penal institution due to suspicion of robbery. Due to a psychotic condition, he was temporarily transferred to the Lucerne Psychiatry (LUPS). After being returned to the detention center, he was placed in a safety cell as a special security measure by the management of the institution. This 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 criminal appeal and claimed inhumane and disproportionate treatment.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_230/2025: Jurisdiction of the TAS regarding the applicability of FIFA regulations on the time limits for claims
Summary of Facts
A Spanish professional football club (A.________) is suing another club (B.________) for financial obligations arising from a Memorandum of Cooperation that ended on June 30, 2021. FIFA rejected the claim as late according to Art. 23 para. 3 RSTJ. Subsequently, A.________ appealed to the TAS, which declared itself not competent, leading to the present appeal to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_792/2025: Change of official defense
Summary of Facts
A.________ was assigned an official defender by the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office 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 Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich. A.________ is challenging these decisions before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_669/2025: Withdrawal of driver's license due to an offense abroad
Summary of Facts
The motor vehicle control of the Canton of Solothurn revoked the driver's license of the appellant A.________ for a duration of 12 months due to a serious offense in Serbia and ordered attendance at traffic education for repeat alcohol offenders. The unlawful act consisted of driving a vehicle under the influence of alcohol (1.49 g/kg blood alcohol). The previous instance, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn, rejected the appeal against this decision. The appellant requested, among other things, the annulment of the judgment and the inclusion of the complete files of the Serbian criminal proceedings before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_941/2025: Non-admission of the appeal due to lack of justification
Summary of Facts
The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Court. He complained of denial of justice and requested the annulment of the decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau, which did not admit or rejected a denial of justice appeal. The dispute was, among other things, the justification of a decision of the District Court of Brugg in the context of a civil procedure.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_685/2025: Decision on the extradition of A.________
Summary of Facts
A.________, a French and Cameroonian citizen, 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.________ filed an objection citing political offense, which was rejected by the previous instance, the Appeals Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court. He then filed an appeal with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_683/2025: Decision regarding the granting of a short-term residence permit
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a Cameroonian, applied for a short-term residence permit based on Art. 21 para. 3 LEI after his asylum applications were rejected and a valid expulsion decision was issued. Despite his graduation in Switzerland, the competent authority rejected his applications, referring to the exclusivity of the asylum procedure. The appellant appealed to various courts, all of which dismissed his complaints.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_970/2025: Judgment regarding the appeal against the rejection of a challenge to the enforcement of a seizure
Summary of Facts
In the context of a debt collection procedure of the Canton of Basel-City against A.B.________, the debt collection office Mendrisio issued a loss certificate for CHF 689.35 on September 24, 2025, after an unsuccessful seizure was carried out. The cantonal supervisory authority rejected the appeal of the debtor, which was filed on October 9, 2025, against the actions of the debt collection office on October 22, 2025. It classified the appellant's arguments as insufficient, unfounded, or irrelevant and particularly rejected the objection regarding the incorrect spelling of the appellant's name in the debt collection records as unfounded.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_682/2025: Inadmissibility of the appeal against the material assessment of intellectual or physical abilities
Summary of Facts
A.________'s failed maturity exam from August/September 2025 led to an appeal procedure before the Federal Administrative Court against the decision of the Swiss Maturity Commission. After the rejection of requests for superprovisional and provisional measures as well as for free legal assistance, the Federal Administrative Court declared several reconsideration requests and the appeal ultimately inadmissible. A.________ subsequently filed an appeal with the Federal Court against the last interim decision of the Federal Administrative Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_19/2025: Assessment of the refusal of a residence permit for family reunification
Summary of Facts
The Kosovo national A.A.________ applied for a residence permit under 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 means. The Cantonal Court of Fribourg confirmed the refusal and the dismissal of the request for free legal assistance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_612/2023: Dismissal of the appeal due to alleged abuse of assets
Summary of 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 an oral agreement among investors in the context of a real estate claim. The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Vaud did not pursue the complaint. This decision was later confirmed by the cantonal Criminal Law Appeals Chamber.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1397/2024: Judgment on drug trafficking and asset seizure
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a Spanish citizen 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 previous instance imposed a sentence of 16 months (partly conditional) and a fine of 500 francs, confirmed the seizure of assets, and maintained the arrest on part of his assets. The appellant particularly disputed the amount of the sentence, the replacement claim, and the continued existence of the arrest.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_272/2025: Unsealing of data carriers in criminal proceedings
Summary of Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office is conducting a criminal investigation against A.________ on suspicion of multiple sexual acts with a child and multiple pornography. He is suspected of having pressured the minor B.________ to send him photographic recordings of a sexual nature. On December 4, 2024, extensive electronic material was seized during a house search, which was sealed. The Public Prosecutor's Office requested the unsealing of these data carriers, while the appellant requested the rejection of the application and the exclusion of certain data. On February 21, 2025, the coercive measures court ordered the unsealing, against which A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.