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 areas of law.
1C_705/2025: Order regarding the withdrawal of a voting rights complaint for the cantonal referendum
Summary of the Facts
Karl Hotz submitted a complaint regarding voting rights on November 24, 2025, against the referendum of November 30, 2025, concerning the partial revision of the Hospital Act of the Canton of Schaffhausen. He requested the postponement of the vote. The complaint was forwarded to the Federal Court due to jurisdiction. The President of the I. Public Law Division rejected the request for postponement by order dated November 26, 2025, and set deadlines for the payment of court costs and for the comments from the parties involved. On November 28, 2025, the complainant withdrew his complaint.
Summary of the Considerations
The complaint was withdrawn by the complainant on November 28, 2025. According to Art. 32 para. 2 BGG, the proceedings are therefore concluded. Given the circumstances, court costs are waived (Art. 66 para. 1 and 2 BGG). No party compensation is to be provided (Art. 68 BGG).
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The proceedings are concluded due to the withdrawal of the complaint, no costs are incurred, and the order will be communicated to the parties involved.
1C_595/2025: Judgment regarding the voting complaint for the referendum on the E-ID Act
Summary of the Facts
Ramon Kübler filed a voting complaint with the government council of the Canton of Thurgau related to the nationwide referendum on September 28, 2025, regarding the E-ID Act. He requested the annulment of the voting result and the declaration of the vote as null or invalid. The government council did not consider the complaint in its decision of October 6, 2025, as the complaint deadline according to Art. 77 para. 2 BPR was not observed and the alleged irregularities had cross-cantonal effects. Kübler subsequently filed a complaint regarding voting rights with the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The complainant argues that he adhered to the complaint deadline by personally dropping the complaint into the city administration's mailbox on the last day before midnight. The Federal Court doubts whether a personal delivery would be valid but leaves this question open. - **E.2:** The previous instance also did not consider the voting complaint as the irregularities had cross-cantonal effects. The Federal Court states that such questions can generally be examined by it if they have already been addressed in the cantonal proceedings. - **E.3:** The complaint does not meet the justification requirements according to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG, as the complainant's allegations are general, unsubstantiated, and partly incomprehensible. It is not evident how his political rights could have been violated during the referendum.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The complaint is declared inadmissible, and the court costs are imposed on the complainant, without awarding party compensation.
6B_220/2025: Judgment regarding attempted intentional homicide and expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was accused of attempted intentional homicide and multiple bodily injury after he stabbed the complainant opponent in the upper body with a kitchen knife, causing serious injuries that required emergency surgery. The previous instances sentenced the complainant to a prison term of five and a half years, a six-year expulsion, and compensation payments.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1**: The files were included ex officio, and the procedural request of the complainant for file inclusion is fulfilled. **E.2**: There were no serious errors in the official defense of the complainant, and the request to repeat all interrogations was rejected. No claim for procedural referral of the indictment was established. **E.3 to E.6**: Arbitrary in the fact-finding was denied. The penalty was assessed based on eventual intent, high culpability, and the danger posed by the offender. The complainant's request for a milder penalty due to criminal record extracts, reduced culpability, and other circumstances was rejected. The previous instance's assessment of the self-defense argument and the qualification as attempted intentional homicide was confirmed. **E.7**: The expulsion for six years was confirmed as there is no serious hardship. The complainant and his family, who are Kosovo citizens, can live in Kosovo. It was taken into account that the previous instance made sufficient considerations of public interest. **E.8**: The civil claims of the complainant opponent and the cost orders in the cantonal proceedings remain unchanged, as the requested acquittal did not occur.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The complaint was dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on the complainant. It was noted that the civil claims were dismissed and the cost orders in the cantonal proceedings remain unchanged.
8C_649/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against a decision of the Administrative and Public Law Court of the Cantonal Tribunal of Vaud from September 30, 2025. The previous instance had declared the complaint against a notice from the Direction générale de la cohésion sociale (DGCS) dated March 31, 2025, inadmissible and dismissed the other complaints against a complaint decision of the DGCS dated May 6, 2025, as well as a provision on precautionary measures from the DGCS dated July 24, 2025, as unfounded. The dispute primarily concerned questions of support in the area of social assistance, particularly regarding the assumption of electricity costs.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_458/2025: Assignment of an employer to a UVG insurer by the compensation fund
Summary of the Facts
The Groupe Mutuel terminated the "Accident Insurance according to UVG" for A.________ AG at the end of 2024. The insurance broker of A.________ AG requested the assignment of a new insurer from the UVG compensation fund, as three UVG insurers had declined. The compensation fund assigned A.________ AG to SWICA Insurance AG. SWICA opposed the assignment but was confirmed by the appeal decision and the cantonal court. It then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1212/2025: Decision on Complaints Due to Non-Taking
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed criminal charges for property theft and coercion, as well as for alleged violations of personality rights, which were not addressed by the Zurich-Limmat Public Prosecutor's Office with decisions dated March 10, 2025, and June 17, 2025. This was confirmed by the Cantonal Court of Zurich. Before the Federal Court, the complainant requested the complaint against these decisions, but did not sufficiently explain his standing to complain and the violation of procedural rights.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_664/2024: Judgment on the Distribution Agreement and Claim for Damages
Summary of the Facts
A distribution agreement was concluded between A.________ AG and B.________ LLC concerning outstanding invoices and claims for damages. A.________ AG had not settled due invoices from B.________ LLC since January 2019. B.________ LLC asserted outstanding purchase price claims, while A.________ AG raised counterclaims as set-offs, which were only partially accepted by the previous instance. The Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich partially upheld the original claim and rejected the counterclaims for damages put forth by the complainant. The Federal Court reviewed the present complaint against the judgment of the Commercial Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_594/2025: Judgment on the Challenge of a Building Permit for the Construction of a Wall
Summary of the Facts
The legal dispute concerns the construction of a wall on the property of the complainant opponent in Bellinzona, which affects the use of a path by the complainant and access to a semi-underground room. The building project was approved by the municipal council, and the complainant and another owner raised objections against it. The cantonal authorities and the Administrative Court dismissed the complaints as there were no public law obstacles.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_605/2025: Inadmissibility of the Voting Complaint Regarding the Federal Referendum on the E-ID Act
Summary of the Facts
Martin Walder filed a voting complaint on October 1, 2025, with the government council of the Canton of Aargau against the federal referendum on September 28, 2025, regarding the Federal Act on Electronic Identity and Other Electronic Evidence (E-ID Act). He requested that the voting result be declared null or invalid, or alternatively that the proceedings be dismissed. The government council dismissed the complaint to the extent it considered it and decided not to address complaints with cross-cantonal effects. The complaint was forwarded to the Federal Court on October 15, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_205/2025: Decision on the Lease Agreement and Resulting Damages
Summary of the Facts
A lease agreement for a villa in Mont-sur-Lausanne was concluded between the parties. Following contract changes and several changes of ownership, water damage occurred due to flooding in October 2016. The tenants claimed significant damages and terminated the contract due to defects. The landlord raised claims for outstanding rent against this.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_673/2025: Order Regarding Cantonal Referendum on the Partial Revision of the Hospital Act
Summary of the Facts
Jennifer Iseli filed a voting rights complaint on November 7, 2025, regarding the cantonal referendum of November 30, 2025, on the partial revision of the Hospital Act in the Canton of Schaffhausen. She requested precautionary measures, including the suspension of the vote or the postponement of the publication of the voting result. The Chancellery of the Canton of Schaffhausen forwarded the complaint to the Federal Court due to jurisdiction. Following an order from the President of the I. Public Law Division on November 13, 2025, rejecting the precautionary measures and further procedural steps, the complainant withdrew her complaint on November 20, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_569/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against Interim Decision
Summary of the Facts
B.________ Sàrl filed a submission on November 29, 2024, before the Tribunal de première instance in Geneva according to Art. 731b OR against A.________ SA and requested the appointment of a commissioner to represent A.________ SA. The first instance court ordered on April 25, 2025, the appointment of lawyer C.________ as commissioner. A.________ SA subsequently requested the rejection of the judge due to alleged bias. The first-instance decision was contested before the Chambre civile of the Cour de justice of the Canton of Geneva, but was declared inadmissible due to the failure to demonstrate a serious irreparable disadvantage.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_313/2024: Decision Regarding the Revision of a Disability Pension
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, a recipient of a full disability pension since 1992, was repeatedly medically assessed over the years and reviewed by the IV office for the existence of a ground for revision. Following a multidisciplinary expert report from 2016, further medical reports, and unsuccessful integration measures, the degree of disability was reduced in 2022 from previously 100% to 58% and finally by the previous instance to 41%. Against this decision, the complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court and demanded the continuation of the original full pension.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_648/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of a Social Law Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, filed a complaint against the decision of the cantonal administrative court (Tribunal cantonal des Cantons Vaud, Department of Public Law), which had dismissed his social law complaint. The Federal Court examined the admissibility of this complaint, particularly regarding the timely submission.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_559/2025: Judgment Regarding Expulsion Request and Legal Aid
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was ordered by the Regional Court of Emmental-Oberaargau to vacate her apartment in clear cases. She unsuccessfully filed complaints with the Cantonal Court of Bern and the Federal Court, also requesting legal aid. The subject of the Federal Court ruling was the question of the admissibility requirements of the complaint as well as the granting of legal aid.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_249/2025: Judgment on the Recusal Motion of a Court Clerk at the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zug
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, owner of a road parcel, filed a recusal motion against the court clerk F.________ of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zug, as he doubted her impartiality due to possible prior involvement and personal connections to the law firm of the complainants' representatives. The recusal motion was rejected by the previous instance, prompting A.________ to file a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_508/2025: Decision Regarding Final Legal Opening and Legal Aid
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court examines a complaint from the complainant against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern, which granted final legal opening for maintenance amounts of CHF 45,133.-- and rejected the request for legal aid. The complaint to the Federal Court does not meet the justification requirements. A request from the complainant for legal aid for the Federal Court proceedings and for the appointment of a free legal representative is also present.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_551/2025: Review of Alleged Delayed Justice in Connection with an Inter-Municipal Planning Process in the Canton of Ticino
Summary of the Facts
The complainants A.________ and B.________ filed a complaint on October 15, 2020, against the decision of the government council of the Canton of Ticino from September 9, 2020, which approved the inter-municipal zoning plan PR-CIPPS of the municipalities of Collina d'Oro, Grancia, and Lugano. Despite multiple requests, the complaint was neither decided upon nor otherwise handled by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Ticino until September 2025. The complainants therefore filed a complaint regarding delayed justice with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_933/2025: Non-Admittance of the Complaint Due to Insufficient Justification
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against the dismissal order of the Public Prosecutor's Office Department 1 Luzern from May 26, 2025. However, the Cantonal Court of Luzern did not admit it on July 10, 2025. The complainant's submission was subsequently forwarded by the Cantonal Court according to Art. 48 para. 3 BGG to the Federal Court, which accepted it as a complaint in criminal matters.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_235/2025: Judgment Regarding the Challenge of an International Arbitration Award Concerning Coal Purchase Contracts
Summary of the Facts
The parties disputed the conclusion and validity of coal purchase contracts (2021 contracts), which contained an arbitration clause. While the respondent claimed that the contracts were legally valid and the complainant had breached them, the complainant disputed the validity of the contracts and the arbitration proceeding, stating that there was no consent and no representation during the critical contracting phase. The relevant arbitration court found that the contractual terms were fulfilled and the contract was binding. Accordingly, it ordered the complainant to pay USD 1,515,000.-- plus interest.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_996/2025: Review of the Validity of Deliveries in the Debt Enforcement Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ questioned the validity of the delivery of three debt enforcement documents: a seizure protocol dated May 13, 2024, a payment order dated May 16, 2024, and a garnishment protocol dated July 2, 2025. These documents could not be delivered due to their alleged unreachability in Croatia and were instead delivered via police at her residence in the Canton of Ticino, which she rejected. The cantonal authority declared A.________'s complaint against this delivery inadmissible and issued a fine.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_684/2025: Withdrawal of Driver's License – Non-Admittance of Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant had his driver's license for motor vehicles and the ship's master's license revoked indefinitely by the Road Traffic and Shipping Office of the Canton of Bern. After several instances and the finality of a judgment from the Appeals Commission of the Canton of Bern dated December 11, 2024, the complainant submitted new requests, which were treated by the Appeals Commission as a request for revision and subsequently rejected. The complaint filed against this to the Federal Court does not meet the legal justification requirements and will therefore not be processed.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_585/2025: Complaint in Voting Matters Regarding the Referendum on the E-ID Act
Summary of the Facts
Richard Koller filed a voting complaint regarding the federal referendum of September 28, 2025, on the E-ID Act. He requested the annulment of the ballot in the event of acceptance and objected that the federal government's voting explanations violated Art. 10a and Art. 11 BPR as well as Art. 34 para. 2 BV. The government council of the Canton of Bern did not consider the voting complaint. Koller then filed a complaint regarding voting rights with the Federal Court, which also issued a non-admittance decision.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_649/2025: Non-Admittance of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
In this case, the administrative dispute relates to a request for mutual assistance from the Spanish tax authority ("Agencia Tributaria") regarding information concerning A.________ for the period from 2015 to 2018. Based on Art. 25bis of the double taxation agreement between Switzerland and Spain (DBA CH-ES), the Federal Tax Administration (ESTV) granted mutual assistance, which was contested by the complainant before the Federal Administrative Court. The Federal Administrative Court dismissed the complaint. The core question before the Federal Court was whether the previous instances made errors or if there was a "question of fundamental importance".
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_776/2024: Federal Court Judgment on Human Trafficking and Coercion
Summary of the Facts
The Basel-Stadt Criminal Court sentenced A.________ to 39 months imprisonment and a fine for multiple qualified human trafficking offenses, with the appeal being partially upheld. The Appeals Court acquitted him of some charges and reduced the prison sentence to two years. The public prosecutor is appealing with the aim of sentencing A.________ to a higher prison sentence and rejecting the prosecutor's appeal.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_604/2025: Inadmissibility of the Voting Complaint Regarding the Federal Referendum on the E-ID Act
Summary of the Facts
Thomas Markus Keller directed a voting complaint to the Cantonal Commission of Appenzell Innerrhoden, in which he alleged irregularities in the federal referendum of September 28, 2025, regarding the Federal Act on Electronic Identity (E-ID Act). He demanded the annulment of the vote. The Cantonal Commission did not consider the complaint on October 8, 2025, as the alleged irregularities had cross-cantonal effects. Keller filed a complaint regarding voting rights with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_773/2025: Judgment on the Complaint Against Conviction for Attempted Intentional Homicide and Expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court is dealing with a criminal complaint from the complainant A.________ against a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Zurich regarding a conviction for attempted intentional homicide, the ordering of an expulsion, and the obligation to pay compensation. A.________ primarily requests his acquittal, alternatively a reduction of his sentence, and sub-alternatively the waiver of an expulsion.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_65/2023: Complaint Against Decision on Confiscation and Compensation for Third Parties
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court assesses a complaint by A.________, B.________ Ltd, C.________ Ltd, D.________ Ltd, and E.________ Ltd against a decision of the Complaint Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court. This had partially confirmed a confiscation and a compensation claim by the Federal Criminal Court and partially annulled it, as well as referred the question of compensation for unjustified seizures back to the Federal Criminal Court for assessment.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_738/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court is dealing with a complaint from A.A.________ against a decision of the Chambre des recours pénale of the Cantonal Tribunal of Vaud from June 19, 2025. The previous instance partially annulled a dismissal order from the Ministère public de l'arrondissement de l'Est vaudois and referred the matter back for further consideration. The subject of the dispute is a case of damage to property, in which A.A.________ appears as a suspect following an altercation with B.________.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_650/2025: Decision on Mutual Assistance and Inadmissibility
Summary of the Facts
On December 16, 2020, the Spanish tax authority submitted six requests for mutual assistance regarding taxpayer E.________ for the years 2015–2018, based on Art. 25bis of the double taxation agreement (DBA) between Switzerland and Spain. The Federal Tax Administration (ESTV) subsequently issued several disclosure orders and granted mutual assistance on February 25, 2022. E.________, along with other parties involved, challenged this decision before the Federal Administrative Court (BVGer). In a judgment dated October 2, 2025, the BVGer dismissed the complaint. A main point of contention was the accusation of a potential conflict of interest within the Spanish authority, as its officers allegedly received performance-related compensation. In a complaint to the Federal Court, the complainants centrally requested the annulment of the judgment and alternatively the redaction of names of payment recipients.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1209/2025: Decision Regarding the Extension of Pre-Trial Detention
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, a French citizen, was arrested on June 21, 2025, and has since been in pre-trial detention. He is accused of armed robbery by threatening with a knife and violating the Narcotics Act. The previous instances extended the pre-trial detention until December 19, 2025, due to concrete flight risk. The complainant requested the Federal Court to lift the extension and his immediate release, subsidiarily under the condition of alternative measures (e.g., monthly bail of 1,000 euros, control reports, etc.).
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_826/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of a Complaint Regarding the Rejection of Conditional Release
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint against a cantonal decision from July 31, 2025, which confirmed the rejection of his conditional release by the Office d'exécution des peines (OEP) of the Canton of Vaud. This rejection was based, among other things, on the assessment that conditional release was deemed premature due to his recent placement in the closed Curabilis facility and his treatment. A.________ again brought a complaint before the Federal Court, which, according to the judgment, was declared insufficiently motivated and therefore inadmissible.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_551/2025: Dismissal of the Lease Mediation Procedure: Non-Admittance of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, contested the termination of his 2.5-room apartment and requested the declaration of its ineffectiveness and, alternatively, the extension of the lease. The mediation authority for rental matters in the Canton of Schaffhausen initially set a mediation date, which it postponed due to a sick leave notification from the complainant. The complainant did not appear at the substitute date, after which the mediation authority declared his request withdrawn. The complainant appealed, which was dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Schaffhausen. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court, which was not processed due to insufficient justification.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_601/2025: Inadmissibility of Federal Council Voting Explanations
Summary of the Facts
Michael Riggenbach filed a voting complaint with the government council of the Canton of Bern, requesting invalidity and repetition of the vote, as well as a new vote count by independent parties. His complaint concerned the federal referendum on the Federal Act on Electronic Identification. The government council did not consider the complaint, referring to the lack of contestability of federal voting explanations and the cross-cantonal nature of the alleged irregularities.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_487/2025: Obstruction of an Official Act, Property Damage, and Sentencing in the Context of a Dangerous Fleeing Drive
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ drove on August 20, 2022, with at least 1.31 weight per mille alcohol concentration in his blood and committed various serious traffic rule violations during a fleeing drive. He collided with a police vehicle, which incurred damage of CHF 18,176.85. The District Court of Baden sentenced him to a prison term of 27 months, of which 21 months were conditional, as well as a fine. The Cantonal Court of Aargau increased the prison sentence to three years after appeal, granted conditional execution of the sentence for two years, and revoked a previously granted conditional execution of the sentence.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_862/2025: Non-Admittance of Complaint Against the Dismissal of a Criminal Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Court against the non-admittance decision of the Cantonal Court of Aargau regarding the dismissal of a criminal procedure. The Federal Court examined the submission and found that the requirements for the justification of a complaint to the Federal Court were obviously not met, particularly regarding the complainant's standing.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_680/2025: Non-Admittance of the Complaint Regarding Public Employment Law
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was a chemistry teacher at the cantonal school B.________. His workload was reduced to 50% in 2023, which was later deemed unlawful by the Cantonal Court of Luzern. The Cantonal School terminated the employment relationship on July 24, 2024, and removed any suspensive effect from a possible complaint. The Cantonal Court of Luzern found in its judgment dated October 1, 2025, that the termination was unlawful but denied its nullity.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_602/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against the Decision of the Government Council
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, Stephan Werner Kocher, has opposed the voting result of the federal referendum of September 28, 2025, regarding the Federal Act on Electronic Identification and Other Electronic Evidence (E-ID Act). The voting complaint was dismissed by the government council of the Canton of Aargau, to the extent it was considered.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_581/2025: Tenant Expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was ordered by the Civil Court of Basel-Stadt to vacate a rental apartment by September 1, 2025, at the latest. The Appeals Court of the Canton of Basel-Stadt dismissed the appeal filed against this. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court. No comments were obtained.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_155/2025: Validity of a Settlement Agreement in Connection with Medical Liability
Summary of the Facts
A patient was severely injured during a surgical intervention in a clinic due to the accidental use of highly concentrated acetic acid (98%). Following the severe complications, the clinic and the patient reached a settlement agreement in exchange for a payment of 1.5 million francs. The patient later declared the agreement null and void due to error and deceit and filed a civil lawsuit.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_467/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Due to Lack of Payment of Advance Costs
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ Sàrl filed a complaint on September 22, 2025, against a judgment of the Cour d'appel civile des Tribunal cantonal des Cantons Vaud from August 13, 2025. The matter concerns a work contract. The Federal Court requested the complainant to make an advance cost payment within a set deadline. This payment was not made, leading the Federal Court to declare the complaint inadmissible.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.