Latest Court Decisions of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most recent decisions of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three decisions, we present detailed summaries with facts, considerations, and dispositions. For the other decisions, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all decisions are available on the Lexplorer portal. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest decisions tailored to your areas of law.
1C_714/2025: Lack of jurisdiction due to late filing of complaint
Summary of the Facts
The subject of the dispute concerns the refusal of authorization to conduct a criminal investigation against employees of the city clerk's office and the debt enforcement office. The lower court, the Cantonal Court of Zurich, denied the authorization in a ruling dated September 23, 2025. The Federal Court examined the timely submission of the complaint.
Summary of the Considerations
The complainant filed a criminal complaint against several employees of the city clerk's office and the debt enforcement office. After the files were forwarded by the Zug Public Prosecutor's Office and the Limmattal/Albis Public Prosecutor's Office, the Cantonal Court of Zurich decided to deny the authorization. The complaint to the Federal Court was submitted on November 26, 2025, which required examination of its timeliness. According to Art. 44 para. 2 BGG, a judicial delivery is considered executed in the case of an unsuccessful delivery attempt at the latest after seven days (delivery fiction). The delivery period began on October 4, 2025, and the complaint period ended according to Art. 100 para. 1 BGG on November 3, 2025. Since the submission only occurred in November, the complaint was late, and it was not considered. No costs were imposed on the complainant.
Summary of the Disposition
The disposition stated that the complaint would not be admitted and that no costs would be charged. The judgment will be delivered to the parties and the involved authorities.
4A_637/2024: Liability action against corporate bodies
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, former sole managing director of C.________ SA, was sued by the respondent B.________ SA for damages based on an assignment pursuant to Art. 260 SchKG. The damage was allegedly caused by the late filing of the bankruptcy of C.________ SA. The plaintiff was awarded damages of CHF 404'173.75. The lower court, the II. Civil Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Ticino, dismissed A.________'s appeal and found that the first-instance court had correctly relied on Art. 42 para. 2 OR when calculating the damages.
Summary of the Considerations
**E. 1**: The complainant raised his claim correctly according to the regulations of federal jurisprudence, but the subsidiary reference to the constitutional complaint is irrelevant since the procedure is of a civil nature, and the complaint in civil matters is generally admissible. **E. 2.1 to E. 2.2**: The Federal Court applies federal law ex officio (Art. 106 para. 1 BGG) but only examines violations of fundamental rights if they are sufficiently substantiated (Art. 106 para. 2 BGG). Criticisms of an appellate nature are inadmissible. **E. 3 to E. 3.3**: The active legitimacy of the respondent as an assignee under Art. 260 SchKG is confirmed since it is entitled to assert the rights of the bankruptcy estate. The complainant cannot successfully argue that the damage was not lawfully incurred, as this cannot be raised as a defense against the claimed demand according to established case law. **E. 4 to E. 4.3**: The application of Art. 42 para. 2 OR by the lower court is reaffirmed as the damage had to be estimated due to unclear account documents. The complainant is accused of not providing sufficient evidence for his claims and, in particular, not presenting a plausible argument against the assessment of evidence by the first-instance court.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint was dismissed, court costs were imposed, and a party compensation was determined. Delivery was made to the party representatives and the lower court.
2C_62/2025: Judgment regarding the blocking of a domain due to unauthorized gambling
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SAS, a company based abroad, operates a platform for digital trading cards (NFT) and online games that allow for winnings under "A.________.com". The Inter-cantonal Gambling Authority Gespa ordered the blocking of the domain in Switzerland, as the offered online games require authorization. Complaints and objections against this were unsuccessful in the lower courts; A.________ SAS appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examined the requirements for entering the case and found that the complaint was submitted in due form and on time. The lower court is considered inter-cantonal and final, so the complaint is admissible. The request to lift the blocking order directly was not considered due to the devolutive effect. The Federal Court applies the law ex officio and focuses on the alleged deficiencies unless there are obvious violations of the law. The Gambling Act (BGS) requires the authorization of certain gambling activities to ensure their safety and public benefit. Online games without the corresponding authorization must be blocked. The complainant did not dispute the economic dependence between the sold digital trading cards and the online games. The Federal Court confirmed the lower court's finding that there is a monetary stake and a monetary gain within the meaning of Art. 3 lit. a BGS. Since the complainant did not have a valid authorization for her gambling activities, the Federal Court confirmed the legality of the domain blocking.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint is dismissed, and court costs are imposed on the complainant. The judgment will be delivered to the participants in the proceedings and the competent authorities.
5D_51/2025: Decision on alleged denial of justice/delay of justice proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint for denial of justice or delay of justice against the Cantonal Court of Lucerne. The background was a dispute regarding two requests for recusal against judges of the District Court of Kriens, which were partially rejected. The Cantonal Court of Lucerne decided on the matter, rendering the Federal Court proceedings moot.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_914/2025: Inadmissibility
Summary of the Facts
A.________ Sàrl was declared bankrupt with immediate effect by a decision of the president of the District Court of La Côte on October 3, 2025. Against this decision, A.________ Sàrl filed an appeal with the cantonal court on October 9, 2025, requesting the provisional suspension of enforceability (effect of suspensive effect), which was rejected by the president of the cantonal court on October 10, 2025. A.________ Sàrl then filed a complaint with the Federal Court on October 21, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_312/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint regarding the blocking of the commercial register
Summary of the Facts
The procedure concerns a dispute over the ownership rights and control of A.________ AG and B.________ AG. Both parties claim to be sole shareholders of B.________ AG. A.________ AG filed a lawsuit with the Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich and requested precautionary measures, including a blocking of the commercial register. The Commercial Court rejected the requests of A.________ AG and instead granted the counter-request of the defendant, which established commercial register blocks in favor of its registrations.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_403/2024: Judgment regarding building permit for a mobile communication facility outside the building zone
Summary of the Facts
Sunrise GmbH applied for the reconstruction of an existing mobile communication facility on a traffic area outside the building zone in the municipality of Lüsslingen-Nennigkofen, which required an exemption permit under Art. 24 RPG. The objections raised against this, including from A.________, were rejected by the cantonal and municipal authorities. A.________ appealed the decisions to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn, which dismissed the complaints. With a complaint in public law matters to the Federal Court, A.________ requested the annulment of the building permit and the referral of the case back to the lower authorities.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7F_46/2025: Request for revision against a Federal Court judgment
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ requested the revision of the judgment of the Swiss Federal Court of July 15, 2025 (7B_415/2025). The Federal Court had previously not admitted the applicant's complaint due to an obvious lack of reasoning. In the revision request, A.________ attempted to justify why the judgment should be reviewed.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_226/2025: Lack of jurisdiction on the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court after the Cantonal Court of Thurgau dismissed her complaint against a legal opening decision of the District Court of Frauenfeld. The subject of the dispute concerned the definitive legal opening.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_670/2023: New construction of a two-family house in Sachseln: Complaint in public law matters
Summary of the Facts
E.________ applied in 2019 for a building permit for the new construction of a two-family house in Sachseln with a reduction of the prescribed number of floors and distance regulations. The municipal council granted a building permit and the exemption permits in 2020. Neighbors raised objections, which were ultimately dismissed by the municipal council and later by the Administrative Court. The cantonal government revoked the permits, after which the Administrative Court upheld the complaint of the builder. The complainants appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_247/2025: Judgment regarding the issuance of a residence permit (hardship request)
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, an Iranian national, has been in Switzerland since 1986 due to an asylum application. He received a residence permit through a marriage to a Swiss citizen, which was later revoked due to fraudulent activities against social welfare authorities. Several attempts to obtain a residence permit or asylum status failed. Due to enforcement obstacles, he was granted provisional admission in 2022. The complainant again applied for a residence permit in 2023 on the grounds of hardship, which was rejected.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_685/2025: Decision on the reinstatement of a residence permit – Lack of jurisdiction due to obvious inadmissibility
Summary of the Facts
The Kosovo national A.________, originally holding a residence permit EU/EFTA, which was legally revoked, requested the reinstatement of a residence and work permit in Switzerland. The request was denied by the cantonal Office for Migration and Integration. The cantonal authorities also dismissed his objection and complaint against this decision. A.________ filed a complaint in public law matters to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_514/2025: Judgment regarding the non-renewal of the residence permit and expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The Turkish national A.________ entered Switzerland in 2023 after marrying a settled compatriot in 2022. The marriage was separated on December 1, 2023. The Migration Office of the Canton of Solothurn refused to extend his residence permit and ordered his expulsion from Switzerland and the Schengen area. After an unsuccessful complaint to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn, he appealed to the Federal Court, which examined his application for a residence permit.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2D_10/2024: Illegality of an award of contract in public procurement
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG, as the second-placed bidder in the procurement process of the municipality of St. Moritz for electrical installations, challenged the award to the ARGE B.________ due to violations by the member D.________ AG against the provisions of the collective labor agreement. After an initial dismissal by the Federal Court, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden carried out additional factual clarifications and again dismissed the complaint. It argued that the company D.________ AG had no knowledge of the later determined violations at the time of the award. A.________ AG filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint to the Federal Court, which classified the award as unlawful.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_42/2025: Judgment regarding the division of property rights and costs in divorce
Summary of the Facts
The parties, A.________ (complainant) and B.________ (respondent), divorced after 20 years of marriage. The District Court of Zurich regulated the consequences of the divorce, including property claims, adult maintenance, and post-marital support. A.________ contested the partial regulations, while the Cantonal Court of Zurich reduced the post-marital support and dismissed the other points of the appeal. In the present complaint, A.________ questioned the division of property rights and the cost consequences.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_233/2025: Denial of the extension of the residence permit of a Kosovo national after divorce
Summary of the Facts
The Kosovo national A.________ lived in Switzerland since 2019 after marrying a Slovenian national and held a temporary residence permit. The marriage was divorced in 2023, and A.________ subsequently applied for an extension of his residence permit, which was denied by the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich. He appealed against the negative decisions of the Security Directorate and the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_864/2025: Decision regarding the non-initiation order and lack of jurisdiction of a complaint
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court examined a criminal complaint against the non-initiation order of the Regional Public Prosecutor's Office Bern-Mittelland and the corresponding decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern. The complaint was deemed obviously inadmissible since the conditions for legal standing were not met and no formal objections were raised. The applicant's request for free legal aid was also dismissed.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_207/2025: Judgment regarding the challenge of a discretionary assessment
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ AG (formerly B.________ AG) contested the discretionary assessment by the cantonal tax office of Zurich for the tax period 2021. Despite reminders, the company did not submit a timely tax return in either the Canton of Zurich or the Canton of Thurgau. As a result, the Zurich tax office made a discretionary assessment, which was contested by the company as null. The lower courts dismissed the objection due to late reasoning and other legal requirements. The point of contention before the Federal Court was the question of the nullity of the discretionary assessment of the Zurich tax office.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_365/2025: Serious bodily injuries due to negligence
Summary of the Facts
On February 22, 2018, the employee C.________ suffered serious injuries in a workplace accident on the vineyard of A.________, leading to the amputation of his right arm and part of his ear. The accident occurred during work with a prototype forestry machine, whose safety devices had been removed. A.________ and B.________ were convicted of serious bodily injury through negligence.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_436/2023: Decision regarding dog ownership and classification in breed type list II in the Canton of Zurich
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ owns his dog B.________ in the Canton of Zurich. Due to external characteristics, the dog was classified by the cantonal authorities in breed type list II, which includes potentially dangerous breeds and whose ownership is prohibited in the Canton of Zurich. The cantonal veterinary office ordered the definitive confiscation of the dog unless A.________ rehomed the dog or moved away within the deadline. A.________ appealed this to the Federal Court, claiming that the classification was arbitrary and violated his fundamental right to personal freedom.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_709/2025: Judgment regarding the authorization procedure and recusal request
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint and a subsequent supplementary request against B.________, who is a caseworker with prosecutorial powers. He also requested her recusal. The prosecution chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen consolidated these proceedings and denied the authorization for prosecution as well as the handling of the recusal request.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_79/2025: Judgment regarding the extension of study time and access to files under the Disability Equality Act
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, suffers from cognitive impairments following a traumatic brain injury and has been admitted to the Master's program in Environmental Science at ETH Zurich since 2019. After reaching the maximum study period, he requested an extension of three and a half years under the Disability Equality Act (BehiG). ETH Zurich granted him a study extension of two semesters and set conditions for a further extension. Moreover, A.________ requested access to files from previous procedures, which was rejected. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed ETH Zurich's decision regarding the extension of the study period and dismissed the request for access to files.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_334/2025: Causal connection in an accident with shoulder injuries
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, suffered a workplace accident on September 23, 2021, during which he fell on his right shoulder and back, sustaining contusions. The Swiss Accident Insurance (CNA) recognized benefits until June 5, 2022, but later rejected further payments on the grounds that the health complaints were no longer in a natural causal connection to the accident. Following a judicial expert report, the lower court nonetheless awarded benefits to the complainant until September 21, 2024. The CNA appealed against this.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_866/2025: Judgment regarding non-initiation in criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against two non-initiation orders of the Statthalteramt of the district of Pfäffikon, which were dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Zurich on August 22, 2025. The complainant subsequently filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8F_17/2025: Lack of jurisdiction on a request for revision regarding unemployment insurance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a request for revision with the Federal Court against its judgment of September 19, 2025 (8C_495/2025) regarding unemployment insurance. The applicant was required to pay a cost advance of CHF 500.-, which he did not provide either within the original deadline or within a granted extension.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_991/2025: Inadmissibility of a late complaint against a non-initiation order
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Zug, I. Complaint Chamber, dated August 19, 2025. This decision concerned the non-initiation of a criminal proceeding by the public prosecutor's office of the Canton of Zug. However, the complainant's complaint was submitted late, which led to a lack of jurisdiction.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_713/2025: Decision regarding authorization proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint against B.________, a former public prosecutor, as well as against employees of the Cantonal Police of St. Gallen. He accused them of arbitrariness, racism, and abuse of office. The prosecution chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen denied the authorization to open a criminal proceeding.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_310/2025: Judgment regarding the complaint against a road construction project involving expropriations
Summary of the Facts
The property owner A.________ opposes a road construction project for the cantonal road No. 55 in the municipality of Wolfhalden, which involves renovation and expansion works and is associated with expropriations and temporary claims on her parcel. The lower courts, including the Cantonal Court of Appenzell Ausserrhoden, dismissed the complaint. A.________ appealed this before the Federal Court with a complaint in public law matters.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_676/2025: Decision regarding a supervisory complaint and the dismissal of a procedure due to withdrawal
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ had submitted a supervisory complaint against lawyer B.________ to the Lawyers' Commission of the Canton of Aargau, which was dismissed as unfounded. Her subsequent complaint to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau was not substantively dealt with because, as a complainant, she had no party rights and was therefore not legitimized. After she refused to pay her cost advance and ultimately withdrew the complaint, the Administrative Court dismissed the procedure as completed without imposing procedural costs. The complainant filed a complaint against this decision to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_784/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint regarding the annulment of a bankruptcy decision
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SA was declared bankrupt at the request of the Cassa cantonale di compensazione AVS/AI/IPG by the decision of the first-instance court on May 15, 2025. After an appeal to the cantonal appeal authority was dismissed, A.________ SA in liquidation filed a civil complaint with the Federal Court, aiming to refer the case back to the lower court for re-evaluation and to suspend the enforcement of the bankruptcy decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_910/2025: Order regarding alleged denial of justice/delay of justice by the Cantonal Court of Lucerne in connection with a recusal request
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was involved in several debt enforcement actions initiated by B.________ AG and filed a lawsuit and complaint with the District Court of Kriens, presided over by two district judges. A request for recusal against the district judges was dismissed. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Lucerne, alleging denial of justice and delay of justice. The Cantonal Court has since decided on the complaint, rendering the Federal Court proceedings moot.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_556/2025: Lack of jurisdiction on the complaint against an arbitration award of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS)
Summary of the Facts
A professional football club filed a complaint against an arbitration award of the Tribunal Arbitral du Sport (TAS), which confirmed a prior decision of the Players' Status Chamber of FIFA. The complaint was deemed obviously inadmissible by the Federal Court as it was not submitted in due time.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_510/2025: Lack of jurisdiction on a complaint regarding a request for revision
Summary of the Facts
The complainant challenges a decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne dated August 22, 2025, in which a request for revision was dismissed. The Federal Court examined the admissibility of the complaint and decided not to consider it due to a lack of timely and sufficient reasoning.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_127/2025: Revocation of a settlement permit and issuance of a residence permit
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a Turkish national, has been residing in Switzerland since 1988 and has held a settlement permit since 1997. Due to various criminal convictions, significant financial mismanagement, and ongoing reliance on social assistance, his settlement permit was revoked and replaced with a residence permit. A.________ claimed health issues and challenged the downgrade by the Office for Migration and Integration of the Canton of Aargau as well as the dismissal of his complaint by the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_678/2025: Judgment regarding the complaint concerning precautionary measures in unemployment insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant requested precautionary measures in the context of the delay complaint procedure regarding the review of her claim for unemployment benefits. The cantonal court dismissed the request, stating that the complainant had not fulfilled her duty to cooperate, that the urgency was self-inflicted, and thus no super-provisional measures appeared necessary.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_687/2025: Judgment regarding the voting complaint concerning the popular initiatives
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a voting complaint with the government council of the Canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden regarding the popular votes of November 30, 2025, on two popular initiatives. She demanded the cancellation of the votes or the annulment of the voting results. The government council dismissed her complaint as far as it considered it and imposed procedural costs of CHF 500.-- on her. A.________ subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court and repeated her legal requests.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_350/2025: Decision regarding the downgrade of a residence permit to a settlement permit
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a national of B.________, who has lived in Switzerland since 1990, held a settlement permit that was revoked by the Migration Service of the Canton of Neuchâtel due to his long-standing and significant dependence on social assistance (over CHF 382,000 in debts) and replaced with a residence permit. The complainant unsuccessfully sought to maintain his settlement permit without conditions and filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the downgrade of this permit until the end.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_170/2025: Decision of the Federal Court regarding building request outside the building zone (lack of jurisdiction)
Summary of the Facts
The complainant intended to make structural adjustments on a plot of land in the agricultural zone of the municipality of Seewis in Prättigau. The original building permit was granted on December 4, 2020. Unauthorized construction work occurred, leading to a construction stop. Repeated inspections and correspondence took place. The municipal council of Seewis rejected the follow-up permit for the modified construction projects and ordered the restoration of the lawful status. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden dismissed the builder's complaint against this decision. The complainant then turned to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_242/2025: Complaint against the refusal of a declaratory order and access to files by ETH Zurich
Summary of the Facts
A.________, now excluded from the Master’s program, requested a declaratory order on specific questions about organizational and study-related aspects at ETH Zurich and access to files from previous procedures.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.