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 tailored to your areas of law.
7B_1225/2025: Dismissal of the complaint due to withdrawal
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters against a decision of the Bern Cantonal Court on November 11, 2025. On November 28, 2025, she withdrew her complaint for financial reasons.
Summary of the Considerations
The complainant withdrew her complaint on November 28, 2025, for financial reasons. As a result of the withdrawal, the proceedings are to be dismissed as completed according to Art. 32 para. 2 BGG. Since the complainant ended the proceedings herself through the withdrawal, she will be charged federal court costs of CHF 300.– according to Art. 66 BGG.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The proceedings are dismissed due to the withdrawal of the complaint, and the complainant is charged court costs of CHF 300.–.
4D_221/2025: Decision regarding the non-admittance of a complaint due to insufficient justification
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a decision of the District Court of Lenzburg dated July 31, 2025, with the Cantonal Court of Aargau. On October 20, 2025, the Cantonal Court did not admit the complaint due to insufficient justification. The complainant then submitted a complaint to the Federal Court on November 3, 2025.
Summary of the Considerations
The Cantonal Court of Aargau did not admit the complainant's complaint because no sufficient justification was provided. The Federal Court examined the complaint and found that the justification requirements according to Art. 42 para. 2 and Art. 106 para. 2 BGG were obviously not met. Accordingly, the Federal Court did not admit the complaint in the procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG. Court costs will be imposed on the complainant according to Art. 66 para. 1 BGG; no party compensation for the respondent is necessary (Art. 68 para. 3 BGG).
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The Federal Court did not admit the complaint and imposed court costs of CHF 800.– on the complainant. No party compensation was granted.
5A_978/2025: Order of summary bankruptcy proceedings and rejection of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
Bankruptcy was opened against the complainant A.________ GmbH in liquidation. The District Court of Frauenfeld subsequently ordered the summary bankruptcy proceedings. The complainant filed several complaints against this decision and against the rejected request for legal aid, which remained unsuccessful in the cantonal instances. The Federal Court deals with the complaint against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Thurgau dated September 30, 2025.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court can only review the decision of the Cantonal Court, not that of the District Court. According to Art. 75 BGG, all cantonal instances must be exhausted. Justifications according to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG must be targeted and legally compliant. The Cantonal Court did not admit the complaint of December 18, 2024, due to late submission and confirmed the invalidity of the complainant's claims. The rejection of legal aid was based on its lack of prospects for success. The complainant alleged bias of the participating presiding judge. Since no legitimately new grounds for disqualification were asserted, this objection is unfounded. The complainant repeated her accusations inadequately and could not fulfill the justification requirements. Her claims regarding the cost imposition are also inadequately justified. The complaint is obviously inadmissible and contains no sufficient justification. The president does not admit it in the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. a and b BGG. The request for legal aid is rejected, and the court costs are imposed on the complainant.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The complaint will not be processed, the request for legal aid is rejected, and the complainant must bear the court costs.
7B_1033/2025: Decision on the complaint against a non-admittance decision
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ submitted a complaint to the Federal Court after the St. Gallen Cantonal Court rejected his complaint against the non-admittance decision of the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of St. Gallen, Investigation Office Gossau. The Federal Court complaint concerns the issue of justification and admissibility of the complaint regarding a civil claim according to Art. 81 para. 1 lit. b no. 5 BGG.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_884/2025: Decision regarding the inadmissibility of the complaint in criminal matters and rejection of the requests for disqualification
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed several complaints against decisions of the Federal Criminal Court, including the non-continuation of criminal complaints by the Federal Prosecutor's Office, the rejection of a request for disqualification by the Federal Criminal Court's complaint chamber, and the cancellation of a review by the Federal Criminal Court's appeal chamber. Furthermore, he requested measures according to Art. 104 BGG and complained of an alleged institutional denial of justice.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_129/2024: Judgment on the building permit for the mobile communications facility
Summary of the Facts
Swisscom plans to build a mobile communications facility in Münchwilen, consisting of a 30 m high metal tower with antennas and a technical cabin. An objection to the building application led to a decision by the Department of Construction and Environment of the Canton of Thurgau, which granted the building permit with ancillary conditions. A complaint against this decision to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Thurgau was rejected. The proceedings were further appealed to the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_636/2025: Non-admittance of the complaint and rejection of the request for restoration of the deadline
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, born in 1940, is insured with Atupri Health Insurance for mandatory health insurance according to KVG. After not paying the premium for May 2024 despite a cantonal subsidy, Atupri initiated debt collection. The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Ticino largely rejected the objection raised by the complainant, but reduced the reminder costs. The complainant requested the Federal Court to restore the deadline to file a complaint against the decision of the Social Insurance Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_928/2025: Federal Court ruling on the quality of the complaint in a criminal matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainants (A.________ SA, B.________ Sàrl, and C.________) filed a criminal complaint against the judgment of the Chambre pénale de recours de la Cour de justice de la République et canton de Genève dated July 31, 2025, which had rejected their previous complaint regarding a discontinuation order from February 14, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_1062/2025: Decision regarding the opening of bankruptcy
Summary of the Facts
The Cantonal Court of Zug opened bankruptcy proceedings against A.________ AG at the request of the compensation fund Zug and the IV Office Zug due to uncovered claims in a debt collection procedure. The Cantonal Court of Zug rejected the complaint filed against this decision. A.________ AG then appealed to the Federal Court, requesting the case to be referred back for a new decision and the granting of suspensive effect.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1014/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against the non-admittance decision
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court is dealing with a complaint from the complainant A.________ against the non-admittance decision of the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Zug and the rejection of legal aid by the Cantonal Court of Zug.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_369/2025: Access to a route on foreign property
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, owner of several properties in the municipality of U.________, used a mountain route running over her parcels for agricultural purposes. After a cantonal instance demanded the legalization of this route as a hiking trail, the peace judge of the Veveyse district ordered the “Mise à ban” of the route, while certain exceptions such as access to forests and pastures (according to Art. 699 para. 1 ZGB) were preserved. Due to opposing opinions, the peace judge modified the original measure. This decision was confirmed in the cantonal instance. The complainant then appealed to the Federal Court to enforce the complete closure of the route for individuals as well as certain groups and to declare the objections of tourism and sports organizations inadmissible.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_54/2025: Tax law classification of shares in self-employment
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________, a self-employed lawyer living in Lucerne and working in Nidwalden, generated income in 2019 from the sale of shares in C.________ AG and dividends from shares in D.________ AG. The cantonal tax authority assessed the income from these transactions as income from self-employment, which was contested by the complainants. The Cantonal Court of Lucerne rejected the complaint, after which the complainants submitted a complaint in public law matters to the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_686/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Valais dated November 4, 2025, which declared a request for revision by A.________ regarding a municipal aid request inadmissible. The original judgment of the Cantonal Court dated October 20, 2025, as well as the request for revision, addressed an alleged violation of constitutional rights, particularly the right to a fair hearing and the prohibition of arbitrariness.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_575/2024: Judgment on a municipal road construction project
Summary of the Facts
A.________, owner of two properties in Caslano, filed an objection against the second phase of a municipal road renovation project, which includes the widening of the road, the construction of a sidewalk, and the establishment of bus stops. The project was approved by the municipal council of Caslano on February 23, 2022, and subsequently, despite the objection from A.________, by the cantonal council on March 29, 2023. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Ticino rejected the complaint against these decisions on August 29, 2024. Against this judgment, A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1017/2025: Judgment on the non-admittance of a criminal proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of Winterthur/Unterland issued a non-admittance decision on May 6, 2025. The complainant A.________ challenged this decision before the Cantonal Court of Zurich, III. Criminal Chamber, which rejected her complaint by decision on September 1, 2025. Against this, she filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_454/2025: Judgment on liability according to Art. 679 in conjunction with Art. 684 ZGB in connection with a major fire
Summary of the Facts
The B.________ AG is the owner of a property in the industrial quarter 'D.________', where a major fire broke out on May 29, 2022, which spread to neighboring properties. This caused destruction of warehouses, inventory, and hemp products of A.________ GmbH, resulting in damages of approximately CHF 1.5 million. A.________ GmbH asserted claims for damages against the property owner of the neighboring property.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_691/2025: Decision on the admissibility of a complaint in asylum law
Summary of the Facts
The Beninese national A.________ submitted an asylum application in Switzerland on October 9, 2023. The State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) rejected the application with a decision dated May 15, 2025, and ordered expulsion from Switzerland. The Federal Administrative Court, Chamber V, rejected the complaint from A.________ against this decision on November 21, 2025. On December 2, 2025, A.________ submitted a letter to the Federal Court, which was described as a "request for review or revision."
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4D_168/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against the granting of final legal admission
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court aimed at overturning the decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern dated July 25, 2025. With this decision, the Cantonal Court did not admit the complainant's complaint in connection with the granting of final legal admission for a claim of CHF 1,000.–.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_511/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint against an arbitration award
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, a private individual, filed a complaint against the arbitration award of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS) dated August 28, 2025. In that decision, the TAS partially upheld an appeal by the complainant and partially amended the decision of the respondent, the Union B.________. The Federal Court examined the admissibility of the complaint and decided to treat it as a late submission.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_588/2024: Dissolution of co-ownership of the family apartment in the context of divorce
Summary of the Facts
A.________ (complainant) and B.________ (respondent) are separated spouses and parents of a son. The marital family apartment was assigned for exclusive use to the complainant during their separation. In addition to divorce proceedings, the respondent had previously separately sued for the dissolution of co-ownership of the property. The District Court did not admit this lawsuit, which the Cantonal Court overturned and referred back for a new decision and procedural supplementation. The complainant challenged this referral before the Federal Court with a complaint.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_174/2025: Judgment on the timely electronic submission of a complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, re-registered for benefits from the disability insurance, which was rejected by the IV Office of the Canton of Zurich. A complaint against this decision was submitted electronically, but with the delivery method "Confidential" instead of "Registered." The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich did not admit the complaint, as it had not been transmitted validly.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_623/2025: Judgment regarding the return of dealer signs
Summary of the Facts
A.________ requested the return of dealer signs that had previously been withdrawn by the Road Traffic Office of the Canton of Zurich due to a change of location. After multiple challenges before cantonal instances and a previous Federal Court decision (1C_294/2025), A.________ submitted a new corresponding request, which was rejected and deemed legally binding by the lower court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_496/2025: Judgment regarding precautionary evidence in inheritance law
Summary of the Facts
The deceased left a property to her descendants, which was transferred to one daughter below market value during her lifetime. The complainant, one of the heirs, asserted claims for supplementary compulsory shares and requested, in the context of a request for precautionary evidence, the blocking of the deceased's online storage (“myCloud”) to prevent potential loss of evidence.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_911/2024: Withdrawal of a complaint in criminal matters
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, filed a complaint in criminal matters against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Aargau, Criminal Court, 1st Chamber. The subject of the dispute was the compensation for his work as an official defender of B.________. He demanded compensation of CHF 9,779.60 plus VAT, or a referral back to the Cantonal Court for re-evaluation. By letter dated November 25, 2025, he withdrew the complaint.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_626/2025: Judgment regarding legal aid in connection with tax matters
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was punished for eventual intent tax evasion and was imposed with back taxes. He requested the waiver and deferral of fines and procedural costs, which was rejected by the cantonal tax office. After the Administrative Court of St. Gallen also obliged him to pay a cost advance and rejected the legal aid, A.________ appealed to the Federal Court with the complaint to grant him legal aid.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_580/2025: Withdrawal of a complaint regarding tenant eviction
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ GmbH (complainant) filed a complaint against a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Zurich dated October 10, 2025, regarding tenant eviction. By letter dated December 3, 2025, the complainant withdrew the complaint.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_844/2025: Judgment on the opening of bankruptcy against A.________ GmbH in liquidation
Summary of the Facts
The BVG Compensation Fund made claims against A.________ GmbH in a debt collection procedure. After the single judge of the District Court of March unsuccessfully opened bankruptcy proceedings, the GmbH submitted a complaint to the Cantonal Court of Schwyz, which was rejected. Subsequently, the GmbH appealed to the Federal Court to achieve the cancellation of the bankruptcy and the dismissal of the bankruptcy petition. A.________ GmbH claimed that it had fully paid the debt and was solvent.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_187/2025: Judgment on the nullity of a cantonal court judgment and request for revision
Summary of the Facts
In the nullification proceedings between A.________ and B.________ AG, Dr. iur. Pius Gebert, as the sole judge of the Cantonal Court of Appenzell Ausserrhoden, rendered the judgment on December 15, 2023, whose reasoned written version was later signed by MLaw Lorena Studer. After a late appeal, A.________ requested the revision of the decision of the Cantonal Court not to enter into the matter, as well as the declaration of the nullity of the cantonal court judgment. The Cantonal Court did not admit the request for revision and denied the nullity. A.________ subsequently filed a civil complaint and a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_1058/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint against protective custody
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was placed in protective custody at the B.________ clinic on October 7, 2025, based on a medical referral. Her complaint against this placement was rejected by the District Court of Zurich on October 14, 2025. During the complaint proceedings before the Cantonal Court of Zurich, the KESB Zurich decided on the placement on November 3, 2025. Subsequently, the Cantonal Court of Zurich declared the original complaint moot. The complainant then submitted a request to the Federal Court on December 6, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_604/2024: Review of the deadline preservation requirements for electronic submissions to authorities
Summary of the Facts
The complainant registered for benefits from the disability insurance in 2020 due to migraines. The IV Office Zurich rejected the application with a decision dated June 25, 2024. The complainant submitted her complaint electronically, using a delivery method that did not meet the requirements on the PrivaSphere platform. The lower court did not admit the complaint due to the late and incorrectly transmitted submission.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_234/2025: Judgment on incapacity for work and disability pension in connection with mental and somatic illnesses
Summary of the Facts
The respondent applied for benefits from the disability insurance in February 2018, as she suffered from psychological stress due to an increased risk of cancer. After multiple medical examinations and based on a structured evidence procedure, the IV Office rejected a pension benefit. The lower court overturned this decision, established a work incapacity of 75% since August 2017, and referred the matter back to the IV Office for further clarifications. The IV Office appealed against the judgment and requested confirmation of its decision and the determination that the certified incapacity for work was not normatively tenable.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_948/2025: Judgment on forwarding a request for restoration of a deadline
Summary of the Facts
A.________ requested the Federal Court to restore a missed deadline for submitting an appeal in connection with a procedure for simple bodily injury. The Federal Court determined that it was not competent for the request for restoration of the deadline and that the request should be forwarded to the Cantonal Court of Zurich as the competent authority.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_372/2025: Judgment on the suspension of a deportation
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced to a suspended prison sentence and a deportation by the Cantonal Court of Bern for a quantitatively qualified violation of the Narcotics Act (BetmG). In March 2025, he requested the Cantonal Court to suspend the legally binding deportation for two to three weeks to visit his children during the spring holidays. The request was rejected. A.________ then filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_256/2025: Review of the regulation on police personnel in the Canton of Geneva
Summary of the Facts
The regulation on police personnel (RGPPol) of the Canton of Geneva, adopted by the State Council, came into force on July 3, 2024. It contains provisions on the powers of the police hierarchy, promotions, and the powers of security staff (ASP). Two parties filed a complaint with the Federal Court against it. They specifically requested the complete or partial annulment of the regulation, based on legal violations such as discrimination and security reservations.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_688/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against the decision of the Federal Administrative Court
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (A.________) appeals against a decision of the Federal Administrative Court dated November 14, 2025, which did not admit his request for revision of the decision of October 8, 2025. The latter decision concerned the challenge of the cancellation of his facilitated naturalization by the State Secretariat for Migration. The Federal Court has previously ruled (1C_667/2025) that the complaint against the original decision of the Federal Administrative Court was inadmissible.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.