Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the latest judgments of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present 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.
4A_49/2025: Decision on the Interpretation and Application of Art. 82 and 163 OR in a Dispute over a Real Estate Purchase Agreement
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ SA sold several ownership units to the B.________ SA according to a notarial deed dated August 22, 2019. The object was to be fully renovated, with a clause guaranteeing that the annual net yield would not be less than CHF 355,200 for two years; otherwise, the difference would need to be compensated. Another clause stipulated a penalty of CHF 250,000 in case of non-fulfillment by the deadline. Due to delays caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, the originally set handover date was postponed from June 30, 2020, to September 30, 2020. Following further discrepancies, the seller unilaterally declared the termination of the purchase contract on October 12, 2020, leading to lawsuits from both parties.
Summary of the Considerations
The jurisdiction of the Federal Court and the compliance with the prerequisites for appeal are established. The Federal Court states that it decides on violations of federal law (Art. 95 and 106 BGG). It only examines the alleged legal violations, except in cases of obvious errors. The lower court found that the complete renovation of the building was a prerequisite for the handover. The seller did not fulfill its obligation at the agreed time, and therefore the penalty according to the notarial deed must be paid. The seller claims that the assessment of the evidence was arbitrary. It claims to have fulfilled 95%, which would have allowed for a handover. The Federal Court rejected this, as completion did not occur, which was essential for a handover. Regarding the application of Art. 82 OR, the Federal Court states that the seller could not offer any consideration due to incomplete fulfillment of its obligations. The seller argues that the Covid-19 pandemic made it impossible to fulfill its obligations (Art. 163 OR). The Federal Court considers the accusation of the lower court as justified, as the seller did not adequately substantiate the argument.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on A.________ SA. Thus, the original decision remains in effect.
7B_541/2025: Judgment on Non-Admission of a Criminal Proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The association A.________ filed a criminal complaint for serious bodily harm, complicity, and incitement. The Public Prosecutor's Office ordered non-admission on May 22, 2025. The Cantonal Court of Bern, by decision of June 27, 2025, did not admit the association's appeal. The association appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines the admissibility of the appeal. It is timely and correctly formatted (Art. 100 para. 1 and Art. 42 para. 1 BGG). The appeal concerns the association's right to participate in the proceedings, which is why the appellant is entitled to appeal under the Star practice. The non-admission of a criminal proceeding can be challenged according to Art. 393 para. 1 lit. a StPO. Complainants are not parties to the criminal proceedings under current law and therefore have no comprehensive rights (Art. 301 para. 3 StPO). The appellant claimed to be affected by an unlawful non-admission according to Art. 105 para. 2 StPO and therefore entitled to appeal. The Federal Court states that merely filing a complaint does not grant further rights. The appellant does not substantiate further grievances sufficiently, which is why the appeal cannot be admitted (Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 as well as Art. 106 para. 2 BGG). The appeal is dismissed, as no legal error can be attributed to the lower court and the requests of the appellant do not concern protectable interests.
Summary of the Dispositive
The association's appeal was dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on it.
8F_18/2025: Judgment on a Revision Request Regarding Unemployment Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ submitted a revision request against an earlier judgment of the Federal Court (8C_422/2025 from September 15, 2025) regarding unemployment insurance. Following a decision on October 31, 2025, and the rejection of a request for free legal assistance, the applicant was required to pay a cost advance within a deadline of 10 days. The deadline expired on November 17, 2025. The applicant did not pay the prescribed advance.
Summary of the Considerations
The decision to extend the deadline was delivered to the applicant on November 6, 2025, which meant that the deadline expired on November 17, 2025. The applicant did not pay the cost advance either within the set deadline or within the extension period, which, based on Art. 62 para. 3 BGG, leads to the rejection of the revision request under the rules of the simplified procedure (Art. 108 para. 1 lit. a BGG). No court costs will be levied (Art. 66 para. 1 sentence 2 BGG), with the understanding that the applicant cannot expect this legal benefit in the future unless there are changes in the conduct of requests and appeals.
Summary of the Dispositive
The court decided not to entertain the revision request and no court costs will be imposed.
6B_604/2025: Inadmissibility of the Appeal in Criminal Matters
Summary of the Facts
In the present case, A.________ appealed against a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Valais, Cour pénale II, from June 24, 2025, as well as an appeal to the Federal Court. The subject of the dispute concerned the accusations of "faux dans les titres" and "faux commis dans l’exercice de fonctions publiques" against the accused B.________ and C.________, who were convicted in the first-instance judgment of the District Court of Entremont (from April 23, 2023) to conditional fines but were later acquitted by the Cantonal Court of Valais. Civil claims of the appellant were rejected in all instances.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_982/2025: Non-Admission of the Appeal and Rejection of the Request for Free Legal Assistance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an appeal in criminal matters against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern, which had not admitted his appeal regarding an interrogation in the criminal proceedings and imposed procedural costs on him. He also requested free legal assistance before the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_286/2025: Decision on Changing the Official Defense
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office II of the Canton of Zurich initiated criminal proceedings against A.________ for arson and qualified violations of the narcotics law. The appellant was taken into custody in 2022 and has been in pretrial detention since the indictment in November 2023. In September 2024, attorney Daniel U. Walder was appointed as the new official defense counsel at the request of the accused, but due to erroneous actions, caused a significant delay in the proceedings. In January 2025, he was therefore removed from the mandate, and attorney Thomas Fingerhuth was appointed as the official defense counsel. An appeal against this was dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Zurich, after which the appellant appealed to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_472/2025: Removal of Driving Ability Due to Refusal of Examination
Summary of the Facts
A.________ refused on April 30, 2023, a vehicle control stop ordered by the police, fled in panic, and thereby evaded possible examinations to determine his driving ability, which could have been ordered due to his previous cannabis consumption. Additionally, he had purchased and consumed marijuana between April 1, 2023, and May 16, 2023. In the lower court, he was convicted for several violations, with a violation of Art. 91a para. 1 SVG concerning his driving ability being attributed to him. A.________ only contested the fulfillment of the elements of this provision before the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_214/2025: Decision on the Question of Recognition of a Provisional Legal Opening
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SA and other parties entered into a contract in 2016 for a simple partnership to promote real estate. In a later amendment (No. 2), a payment of CHF 1,000,000 in several installments was agreed upon. A.________ SA then initiated debt collection against B.________, who filed a complete objection. After the rejection of the provisional legal opening by the District Court of Sion and the cantonal instance, A.________ SA appealed in civil matters to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_1064/2025: Decision on the Obsolescence of a Cantonal Appeal Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an appeal with the Cantonal Court of Bern on November 10, 2025, against a treatment ordered without consent according to Art. 434 ZGB on November 5, 2025. The Cantonal Court declared the procedure as obsolete by decision of November 17, 2025, due to the appellant's transfer to a regional prison. In a submission dated December 8, 2025, the appellant requested compensation of CHF 5,000 and the appointment of a lawyer from the Federal Court.