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 dispositions. For the subsequent 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 Articles 82 and 163 OR in a dispute over a real estate purchase contract
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ SA sold several property units to B.________ SA according to a notarial deed on August 22, 2019. The property was to be completely renovated, with a clause guaranteeing that the annual net return would not fall below CHF 355,200 for two years; otherwise, the difference would need to be compensated. Another clause regulated a contractual penalty of CHF 250,000 in the event of non-fulfillment by the deadline. Due to delays caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, the originally set transfer date of June 30, 2020, was postponed to September 30, 2020. After further disagreements, the seller unilaterally declared the purchase contract void on October 12, 2020, leading to lawsuits from both parties.
Summary of the Considerations
The jurisdiction of the Federal Court and compliance with the requirements for a complaint are established. The Federal Court states that it decides on the violation of federal law (Articles 95 and 106 BGG). It only examines the alleged legal violations, except in cases of obvious errors. The lower court determined that the complete renovation of the building was a prerequisite for the transfer. The seller failed to fulfill its obligation at the agreed time, thus the contractual penalty must be paid according to the notarial deed. The seller claims that the assessment of the evidence was arbitrary. It claims to have fulfilled 95%, which would have allowed for a transfer. The Federal Court rejected this because the completion did not occur, which was essential for a transfer. Regarding the application of Article 82 OR, the Federal Court notes that the seller could not offer any consideration due to partial non-fulfillment of its obligations. The seller argues that the Covid-19 pandemic made it impossible to fulfill its obligations (Article 163 OR). The Federal Court deems the lower court's accusation justified, that the seller did not sufficiently substantiate its argument.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint was rejected, and the court costs were imposed on A.________ SA. Thus, the original decision remains in effect.
7B_541/2025: Judgment on the non-initiation of a criminal proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The association A.________ filed a criminal complaint for serious bodily injury, complicity, and incitement. The public prosecutor ordered on May 22, 2025, the non-initiation of proceedings. The Cantonal Court of Bern, by decision of June 27, 2025, did not consider the association's complaint. The association appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines the admissibility of the complaint. It is filed in a timely and proper manner (Article 100 para. 1 and Article 42 para. 1 BGG). The complaint concerns the association's eligibility to participate in the proceedings, which is why the complainant is entitled to appeal under the Star practice. The non-initiation of a criminal proceeding can be contested according to Article 393 para. 1 lit. a StPO. Complainants are not parties to the criminal proceedings under current law and therefore do not have comprehensive rights (Article 301 para. 3 StPO). The complainant argued that he was affected by an unlawful non-initiation according to Article 105 para. 2 StPO and was therefore entitled to appeal. The Federal Court states that mere filing of a complaint does not confer further rights. The complainant does not sufficiently substantiate further grievances, which is why they cannot be addressed (Article 42 para. 1 and 2 as well as Article 106 para. 2 BGG). The complaint is to be dismissed, as no legal error can be attributed to the lower court and the complainant's requests do not concern protectable interests.
Summary of the Disposition
The association's complaint was dismissed and the court costs were imposed on it.
8F_18/2025: Judgment on a request for revision regarding unemployment insurance
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ filed a request for revision against a previous judgment of the Federal Court (8C_422/2025 of September 15, 2025) concerning unemployment insurance. Following a decision on October 31, 2025, and rejection of a request for free legal assistance, the applicant was obliged to pay a cost advance within a deadline of 10 days. The deadline ended on November 17, 2025. The applicant did not pay the required advance.
Summary of the Considerations
The decision for the deadline was delivered to the applicant on November 6, 2025, thus the deadline expired on November 17, 2025. The applicant did not pay the cost advance either within the set deadline or within the extended deadline, which, based on Article 62 para. 3 BGG, leads to the non-admittance of the revision request according to the regulations of the simplified procedure (Article 108 para. 1 lit. a BGG). Court costs are waived (Article 66 para. 1 sentence 2 BGG), with the applicant no longer being able to expect this legal benefit in the future, unless there are changes in the handling of requests and complaints.
Summary of the Disposition
The court decided that the revision request would not be considered, and no court costs would be charged.
6B_604/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint in criminal matters
Summary of the Facts
In this case, A.________ filed a complaint 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 were the accusations of "faux dans les titres" and "faux commis dans l’exercice de fonctions publiques" against the accused B.________ and C.________, who had been sentenced to conditional fines in the first-instance judgment of the District Court of Entremont (on April 23, 2023) but were later acquitted by the Cantonal Court of Valais. Civil claims of the complainant were rejected at all instances.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_982/2025: Non-consideration of the complaint and rejection of the request for free legal assistance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern, which did not consider his complaint regarding an interrogation in the criminal procedure and imposed procedural costs on him. He also requested free legal assistance before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_286/2025: Decision on the change of official defense
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor II of the Canton of Zurich conducted a criminal proceeding against A.________ for arson and qualified violation of the narcotics law. The complainant was taken into custody in 2022 and remained in detention since the indictment in November 2023. In September 2024, attorney Daniel U. Walder was appointed as the new official defender at his request, but due to erroneous actions, he 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 defender. A complaint against this was dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Zurich, after which the complainant appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_472/2025: Loss of driving ability due to refusal of examination
Summary of the Facts
A.________ refused a vehicle control stop ordered by the police on April 30, 2023, panicked and evaded possible examination measures 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. The lower court convicted him for several offenses, attributing a violation of Article 91a para. 1 SVG concerning his driving ability. A.________ only disputed the fulfillment of the elements of this provision before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_214/2025: Decision on the question of recognizing a provisional enforcement
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 subsequently initiated debt collection proceedings against B.________, who fully contested this. After the district court of Sion and the cantonal instance rejected the request for provisional enforcement, A.________ SA appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_1064/2025: Decision on the lack of object of a cantonal complaint procedure
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Bern on November 10, 2025, against a treatment ordered without consent on November 5, 2025, according to Article 434 ZGB. The Cantonal Court declared the procedure as having no object by order of November 17, 2025, due to the transfer of the complainant to a regional prison. In a submission dated December 8, 2025, the complainant requested compensation of CHF 5,000 and the appointment of a lawyer from the Federal Court.