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 with 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.
8C_286/2025: Judgment on Disability Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, a former caseworker, registered for disability insurance in 2019, among other reasons, due to spinal and shoulder complaints. After medical and professional clarifications, including a psychiatric-orthopedic expert opinion, the IV Office Basel-Stadt rejected a pension claim in 2023, stating that there was no permanent limitation of work capacity. The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Basel-Stadt confirmed this assessment after obtaining an additional opinion from an expert. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court, requesting a quarter pension from February 2020 and a three-quarter pension from August 2022.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** Principles of review in the proceedings of complaints in public law matters. The Federal Court examines the legal defects presented and intervenes in the findings of fact of the lower court only in cases of obvious incorrectness. - **E.2:** The point of contention is whether the cantonal court rightly denied a pension claim from February 2020 based on Art. 28 IVG. - **E.3:** The lower court relied on a comprehensive expert opinion that affirmed the complainant's work capacity in the previous occupation. The Federal Court sees no arbitrariness in the assessment of the medical records by the cantonal court. - **E.3.2:** The choice of examination methods by experts is at their discretion; the lower court correctly accepted this approach. - **E.3.3:** The experts dealt with differing medical assessments and justified their findings in a comprehensible manner. - **E.3.4:** No violation of federal law by the lower court in denying a pension claim.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint was dismissed and the court costs were imposed on the complainant. The judgment was served to the relevant parties.
7B_799/2025: Change of Official Defense Lawyer
Summary of the Facts
A. The complainant was sentenced to four years in prison by the Criminal Court of the Canton of Geneva. Following his conviction, on the request of the complainant, his official defense lawyer was changed. The new appointment took place on June 4, 2025. After the complainant filed a personal appeal as well as another, deficient appeal statement by the new defense lawyer, the president of the appeals chamber of the Geneva court decided to replace the lawyer due to lack of diligence. The complainant challenged this decision before the Federal Court and requested the retention of his lawyer.
Summary of the Considerations
1. **(E.1)**: The complaint is admissible as it was submitted in a timely manner and is directed against a cantonal final decision. The contested decision could cause irreparable harm.
2. **(E.2.1)**: The complainant criticizes the lower court's assessment that the official defense lawyer violated his duties of care.
2. **(E.2.2)**: The Federal Court emphasizes that the right to effective defense must be guaranteed. A change of the official defense lawyer is only justified if effective defense can no longer be ensured.
2. **(E.2.3)**: The behavior of the lawyer, obtaining court documents only on the last day of the collection period, does not justify removal from office according to the Federal Court, as this was neither systematic nor demonstrably detrimental to the defense. The submission of a deficient appeal statement also did not lead to a loss of procedure, as the complainant had previously submitted a valid appeal.
3. **(E.2.4)**: The Federal Court finds that the allegations made are not sufficient to justify the removal of the lawyer. Future violations could, however, be judged differently.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint is upheld, the decision of the lower court is overturned, and the lawyer receives compensation. No court costs were imposed.
1C_679/2024: Access to Official Records of the Child and Adult Protection Authority Schaffhausen; Principle of Public Access
Summary of the Facts
An attorney (complainant) requests access to records of the Child and Adult Protection Authority of the Canton of Schaffhausen (KESB) from 2022, which concern substitute measures and state liability proceedings. The KESB denied access and requested fees for it. The Higher Court of the Canton of Schaffhausen confirmed the denial of access but reduced the fees. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E. 1:** The formal requirements for the admissibility of the complaint are met. - **E. 2:** The complaint can challenge violations of federal and cantonal constitutional law. Qualified justification requirements apply to violations of fundamental rights. - **E. 3:** The complainant relies on the principle of public access and the right to access documents according to Art. 47 (3) of the Schaffhausen Cantonal Constitution, which includes a presumption of free access to official records. Secrecy is only permissible if overriding public or private interests are present. - **E. 4:** The lower court erroneously equated ongoing proceedings with proceedings in which decided measures have not yet been completed. This contradicts the principle that proceedings end with a final decision. The lower court incorrectly assumed that a special interest in access was required. The complainant only requests anonymized records, so personal confidentiality interests are not affected. The lower court did not examine specific confidentiality interests and also did not establish that anonymization was impossible. - **E. 5:** The KESB must inform the complainant in advance if significant fees will be incurred for anonymization. - **E. 6:** The complainant's request to waive the anonymization of his name is denied, as the publication must be made anonymously according to the judgment.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint is upheld, and the decisions of the lower court are overturned. The KESB is asked to reassess, and no court costs are incurred.
7B_956/2025: Non-admission of a Complaint Against a Non-Admission Decision and Considerations on Complaint Legitimacy
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a non-admission decision of the Geneva public prosecutor (from May 19, 2025) with the Chambre pénale de recours of the Court of Justice of the Republic and Canton of Geneva, which dismissed it by decision of August 14, 2025. Against this decision, the complainant filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court on September 15, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_664/2025: Judgment Regarding Extradition to Greece and Legal Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was arrested by Switzerland based on an arrest warrant from Greece. Greece requests extradition for the enforcement of two prison sentences and for the conduct of a criminal proceeding. The Federal Office of Justice (BJ) approved the extradition. The complainant filed a complaint, which was dismissed by the Federal Criminal Court. The complaint to the Federal Court concerns the violation of defense rights as well as issues related to the statute of limitations and personal presence in the proceedings.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
6B_431/2024: Judgment Regarding Qualified Disloyal Business Management and Compensation Claims
Summary of the Facts
The complainant is accused of multiple counts of qualified disloyal business management. As an asset manager of B.________ GmbH, he is alleged to have withheld kickbacks ("retrocessions") from May 2006 to December 2016 without sufficiently informing clients about their nature, scope, and entitlement. This led to a financial loss of CHF 2,141,259.05 for 54 affected clients. The complainant intended to unlawfully enrich B.________ GmbH.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_949/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint for Revision of a Judgment Regarding Debtor Notification
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ requested the revision of a decision of the District Court of Martigny and St-Maurice that ordered a debtor notification and the securing of maintenance payments for B.A.________. The lower court, the civil chamber of the Cantonal Court of Valais, dismissed the application for revision as well as the complaint against the decision of the District Court. A.A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
6B_79/2025: Judgment of the Federal Court on Pornography and Rule of Law Principles
Summary of the Facts
The accused A.________ was acquitted of serious pornographic offenses by the Criminal Court of Geneva on February 19, 2024. He received compensation and had to bear the court costs himself. On November 27, 2024, the Appeals Court decided that an appeal by the prosecutor would be accepted and convicted A.________ of pornography, imposing a fine of 144 daily rates. In addition, he was imposed a fine of CHF 2,880, and the possibility of appeal was denied. A.________ was also permanently excluded from activities requiring regular contact with minors. Numerous pornographic files were found on his computer during a house search.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5D_54/2025: Decision on the Denial of Free Legal Aid in a Distribution Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, who claimed a debt of CHF 20,751.65 in a distribution procedure against the bankrupt bank B.________ SA, requested free legal aid. The vice president of the civil court of the Canton of Geneva rejected her application on June 23, 2025. The appeal against this decision to the vice president of the Geneva judiciary was also dismissed on September 29, 2025. With a complaint filed on November 12, 2025, the complainant approached the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_598/2025: Judgment Regarding the Unsealing of IT Data Carriers in a Criminal Proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor II of the Canton of Zurich is conducting a criminal proceeding against B.________ for various offenses, including false accusation. In connection with a house search of A.________ in Germany, IT data carriers were seized and transmitted to the Swiss authorities. A.________ requested their sealing, after which the Public Prosecutor requested their unsealing. The coercive measures court discontinued the unsealing procedure because A.________ did not appear within the deadline. A.________ appealed this decision to the Federal Court and alleged, among other things, a violation of the right to be heard.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_1053/2025: Decision Regarding a Complaint Against a Seizure Notification
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint on September 2, 2025, against a seizure notification from the Appenzell Mittelland enforcement office dated August 22, 2025, in the context of a debt collection. The Appenzell Ausserrhoden Higher Court, as the lower court, decided on November 11, 2025, not to admit the complaint. Against this decision, the complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court on December 4, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_1273/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint in a Criminal Matter
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court had to deal with the complaint of A.________ against a decision of the single judge of the Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Valais, which declared the cantonal appeal as inadmissible. The appeal concerned a decision of the Regional Office for the Bas-Valais, which had ordered a non-admission.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
6B_625/2025: Decision on the Restoration of a Deadline
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.A., filed an objection against a penal order from April 2, 2024, in which he was convicted of forgery and unlawful obtaining of a false finding. After withdrawing the objection, the Regional Court Jura bernois-Seeland declared the penal order valid on November 25, 2024. Later, A.A. requested the restoration of the deadline for the objection, which was denied by both the Regional Court on February 17, 2025, and the cantonal complaint chamber on June 3, 2025. A.A. then turned to the Federal Court against this last decision.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_616/2025: Decision Regarding the Complaint Against the Denial of Conditional Release from a Measure
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced to three years and six months in prison for several offenses and received a measure according to Art. 64 StGB. Several requests for conditional release were denied in the past. In the complaint before the Federal Court, A.________ sought to achieve conditional release or alternatively the conversion of the measure.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
6B_562/2025: Inadmissibility of Acquittal and Confirmation of Conviction
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.A.________ and C.A.________ were sentenced to conditional prison terms and fines for qualified simple bodily injury and qualified offenses against minors. The lower court confirmed the conviction. A.A.________ filed a complaint and requested his acquittal.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_1066/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint in a Family Law Matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, mother of the child C.________, requests in her complaint before the Federal Court, among other things, the immediate awarding of sole custody, the withdrawal of the father's visitation rights, the cancellation of the guardianship, and the granting of suspensive effect. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed a corresponding complaint and pointed out the immediate enforceability of the orders of the family court, as they serve the best interests of the child. The Federal Court decides that the complaint cannot be admitted as the requirements according to Art. 93 (1) BGG and Art. 98 BGG are not fulfilled and no sufficient constitutional grievances were raised.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_921/2025: Decision Regarding Maintenance Contributions for Children from a Non-Marital Relationship
Summary of the Facts
The father A.A.________ was ordered by the first instance court of the Canton of Geneva to pay monthly maintenance contributions for his two children B.A.________ and C.A.________. On appeal, the civil chamber of the Court of Justice adjusted the father's visitation rights and newly determined the maintenance contributions based on a hypothetical income. The father appealed to the Federal Court, contesting the determination of the hypothetical income and the amount of the maintenance contributions, as he considers his actual income to be lower.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_1099/2025: Non-admission of a Complaint Against an Interim Decision and a Ruling Regarding Wage Garnishment
Summary of the Facts
In the context of a wage garnishment, the complainant filed a complaint with the Higher Court of the Canton of Bern and requested, among other things, suspensive effect. By an order dated December 9, 2025, the distribution of the garnishment proceeds was halted, but the request for full suspension was denied. A subsequent rejection request against a judge and a renewed request for suspensive effect were rejected by decision on December 17, 2025. The complainant then filed a complaint in civil matters with the Federal Court on December 19, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
6B_388/2025: Judgment of the Federal Court on Appeal for Bodily Injury and Sexual Violence
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ was convicted in first instance on June 27, 2024, by the District Court of Vaud for qualified bodily injury, defamation, insult, qualified threats, coercion, and rape. He received a total sentence of 30 months in prison, with 109 days of pre-trial detention credited. In addition, he was fined for 60 days at CHF 30 each, and a fine of CHF 1,000 was imposed. Furthermore, his conditional sentence suspension from April 28, 2021, was revoked, he was ordered to pay CHF 6,000 in damages for non-material harm to the victim, and his expulsion from Switzerland for five years was decided. A.A.________ appealed this judgment, which was dismissed by the Criminal Court of the Canton of Vaud on January 22, 2025. The complainant, who is a French citizen living in Switzerland, claims the right to visit his children and has a problematic history with several criminal convictions, including violence against his previous partner. On April 5, 2023, a situation occurred in which he violently prevented his new partner from leaving the apartment.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_1268/2025: Examination of the Legality of the Extension of Pre-Trial Detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is criminally prosecuted in the Canton of Ticino for multiple offenses, including fraud, embezzlement, and money laundering. He has been in pre-trial detention since his interrogation on August 23, 2024, which has been extended several times. With the contested cantonal decision, the detention was extended until November 22, 2025, which the complainant contests before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
6B_927/2024: Judgment on the Criminal Liability for Insider Information According to Art. 154 FinfraG
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________, former Chief Operating Officer Europe of C.________ AG, was accused of having sold shares of C.________ AG on May 15, 2018, exploiting insider information to avoid a loss of CHF 247,933.56. The lower courts acquitted him of the charge of exploiting insider information according to Art. 154 (1) lit. a FinfraG. The Federal Prosecutor's Office filed a criminal complaint and requested that the complainant be found guilty and punished.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
9C_521/2025: Judgment Regarding Tax Disputes Between a Company and the Tax Administration of the Canton of Geneva
Summary of the Facts
A company that acted as an advisor for a foreign investment fund was reassessed by the tax administration of the Canton of Geneva for the tax periods 2010 to 2013 and was subject to tax claims and fines. The administration found that fees for fund management and service charges were not declared correctly and that a legal construct was created to enable significant tax evasion. The company contested these findings and presented various evidences that, in their view, should refute the accusations.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_999/2025: Withdrawal of the Complaint in a Divorce Matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.A.________ filed a complaint on November 11, 2025, against a judgment of the Cour d'appel civile of the Cantonal Tribunal of Vaud from October 9, 2025, regarding the liquidation of the marital property regime. After submitting a supplementary statement on November 13, 2025, she withdrew her complaint in a letter dated November 10, 2025, received by the Federal Court on December 19, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_1124/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Due to Late Submission
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against a decision of the Criminal Complaint Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Vaud, which declared two complaints against non-admission and non-admission decisions of the District Attorney of La Côte as inadmissible. The complainant also requested free legal aid and a restoration of the deadline.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_988/2025: Dismissal of the Complaint Regarding Non-Admission Decision
Summary of the Facts
The company B.________ SA and A.________ filed a criminal complaint in 2015 for alleged breach of trust, fraud, and disloyal management. They requested an extension of the investigation against the suspects C.________ and D.________ from 2017 to 2021, which they deemed necessary. After several proceedings, the Cantonal Court ordered the expansion of the investigation in 2022. Nevertheless, the Public Prosecutor's Office decided in 2025 with a non-admission decision not to bring charges against C.________ and D.________. The single judge of the Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court confirmed this non-admission decision, against which the complaint was filed with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
6B_918/2025: Dismissal of the Complaint Due to Withdrawal
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ had filed a complaint against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne dated November 10, 2025. With an undated submission received by the Federal Court on December 23, 2025, he withdrew the complaint.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
9C_467/2025: Non-admission of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint against the judgment of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne (5V 24 123) from July 14, 2025. The subject of the proceedings was disability insurance. In a letter dated November 28, 2025, the complainant withdrew the complaint dated September 1, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_406/2025: Delivery of a Payment Order and Timely Filing of the Objection
Summary of the Facts
A.________ initiated a debt collection against B.________ for a claim of CHF 162,000. The enforcement office delivered the payment order to B.________, who filed an objection in a timely manner, which, however, was not noted on the payment order. This led to the issuance of a bankruptcy warning and later to the cancellation of these measures by the enforcement office. The District Court of St. Gallen annulled this decision of the enforcement office; however, the Cantonal Court confirmed the invalidity of the coercive enforcement measures.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_1097/2025: Decision Regarding Non-admission of a Complaint in Proceedings According to Art. 108 BGG
Summary of the Facts
The complainant appeals against a decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Bern, which rejected the opening of a complaint procedure. The Federal Court examines whether the complaint meets the legal justification requirements according to Art. 42 BGG and decides on the non-admission of the complaint as well as on the imposition of costs.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_792/2025: Withdrawal of the Complaint in Divorce Proceedings (Liquidation of the Property Regime)
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint on September 15, 2025, against a decision of the Cour d'appel civile of the Cantonal Court of Vaud from July 21, 2025, regarding the liquidation of the property regime in connection with a divorce proceeding between him and B.________. During the proceedings, the parties entered into a settlement procedure. Following a withdrawal of the complaint on December 18, 2025, the president of the II Civil Law Division of the Federal Court ordered the removal of the case from the register.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_1069/2025: Judgment on the Imposition of Costs in Connection with a Bankruptcy Warning
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ GmbH was pursued for a claim by the tax administration of the Canton of Appenzell amounting to CHF 492.50. After relocating to the Canton of Zug, the enforcement office of Cham issued a bankruptcy warning. The complaint against this was dismissed by the Higher Court of the Canton of Zug, II. Appeal Division, acting as the supervisory authority over debt collection and bankruptcy. Due to malicious false allegations, the lower court imposed a decision fee of CHF 500 according to Art. 20a (2) No. 5 SchKG. The A.________ GmbH contested the imposition of costs before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
9C_398/2025: Inadmissibility of the Challenge to the Cantonal Instruction on Property Tax Values and Imputed Rent Values
Summary of the Facts
The government of the Canton of Zurich issued a detailed instruction on the valuation of properties and the determination of imputed rental values on August 28, 2024, which is to come into effect in 2026. Three complainants, including the home owners' association of the Canton of Zurich, contested the instruction as unlawful and turned to the Federal Court after a decision of non-admission by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich to have the instruction reviewed on the main issue.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_508/2025: Distribution of Proceeds from an Assignment Action According to Art. 260 SchKG
Summary of the Facts
A creditor (A.________) had outstanding claims amounting to CHF 2,693,931.68 in the context of the bankruptcy of B.________ SA. The bankruptcy estate had assigned claims against the company's organs according to Art. 260 SchKG to various creditors, including A.________. In a subsequent legal dispute, the creditor was awarded claims plus interest that exceeded the original claim and generated a surplus. The bankruptcy administration demanded that A.________ return this surplus to the estate.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.