Latest Rulings of the Federal Court
Here you will find the latest rulings of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three rulings, we present detailed summaries with facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the additional rulings, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all rulings are available on the portal of Lexplorer. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest rulings 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 on August 22, 2019. The property was to be fully renovated, with a clause guaranteeing that the annual net yield would not fall below CHF 355,200 for two years; otherwise, the difference would have to be compensated. A clause also stipulated a contractual 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. After further disagreements, the seller unilaterally declared the purchase contract null and void 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 requirements 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 asserted 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 their obligation at the agreed time, thus the contractual penalty had to be paid according to the notarial deed. The seller claims that the evaluation of evidence was arbitrary. They asserted that they had fulfilled 95%, which would have allowed for a handover. The Federal Court rejected this, as completion did not occur, which was necessary 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 their obligations. The seller argues that the Covid-19 pandemic made it impossible to fulfill their obligations (Art. 163 OR). The Federal Court finds the lower court's accusation justified that the seller did not sufficiently 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: Ruling on the non-initiation of a criminal proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The association A.________ filed a criminal complaint for serious bodily injury, aiding and abetting, and incitement. The public prosecutor's office decided on May 22, 2025, not to initiate proceedings. The Cantonal Court of Bern did not accept the association's appeal in a decision dated June 27, 2025. The association appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines the admissibility of the appeal. It is submitted in a timely and proper manner (Art. 100 para. 1 and Art. 42 para. 1 BGG). The appeal concerns the association's standing to participate in the proceedings, which is why the appellant is entitled to appeal under the Star practice. The non-initiation 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 do not have comprehensive rights (Art. 301 para. 3 StPO). The appellant asserted that they were affected by an unlawful non-initiation and thus entitled to appeal under Art. 105 para. 2 StPO. The Federal Court states that merely filing a complaint does not grant further rights. The appellant does not sufficiently substantiate further grievances, thus cannot be considered (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 appellant's requests do not concern worthy interests.
Summary of the Dispositive
The association's appeal was dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on it.
8F_18/2025: Ruling on a request for revision concerning unemployment insurance
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ submitted a request for revision against a previous ruling of the Federal Court (8C_422/2025 of September 15, 2025), which concerned unemployment insurance. Following a decision on October 31, 2025, and the rejection of a request for legal aid, the applicant was required to pay a cost advance within an extended deadline of 10 days. The extended deadline ended on November 17, 2025. The applicant did not pay the required 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 the extended period, which leads to the non-admission of the request for revision according to Art. 62 para. 3 BGG based on the regulations of the simplified procedure (Art. 108 para. 1 lit. a BGG). The imposition of court costs is waived (Art. 66 para. 1 sentence 2 BGG), although the applicant can no longer expect this legal benefit in the future if no changes occur in the conduct of requests and appeals.
Summary of the Dispositive
The court decided that the request for revision is not admitted, 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 ruling of the Cantonal Court of Valais, Cour pénale II, dated June 24, 2025, and also appealed to the Federal Court. The matter 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 by the court of the district of Entremont (on April 23, 2023) to conditional fines but were later acquitted by the Cantonal Court of Valais. Civil claims of the appellant were rejected at all levels.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_982/2025: Non-admission of the appeal and rejection of the request for legal aid
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an appeal in criminal matters against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern, which did not admit his appeal concerning an interrogation in the criminal proceedings and imposed procedural costs on him. He also requested legal aid before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_286/2025: Decision on the change of official defense
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office II of the Canton of Zurich conducted a criminal proceeding against A.________ for arson and qualified violations of the Narcotics Act. The appellant was arrested in 2022 and has been in custody since the indictment in November 2023. In September 2024, attorney Daniel U. Walder was appointed as the new official defender based on a request, who, however, caused a considerable delay in the proceedings due to erroneous actions. In January 2025, he was therefore dismissed from the mandate and attorney Thomas Fingerhuth was appointed as the official defender. An appeal against this was rejected by the Cantonal Court of Zurich, after which the appellant appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
6B_472/2025: Removal of driving ability due to refusal of examination
Summary of the Facts
A.________ refused a police-ordered vehicle control stop on April 30, 2023, fled in panic, and thereby evaded possible investigative measures to assess 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 attributed to his driving ability. A.________ only disputed the fulfillment of the statutory elements of this provision before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_214/2025: Decision on the recognition of a provisional order for legal relief
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SA and other parties concluded 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 was agreed upon in several installments. A.________ SA then initiated debt collection against B.________, who raised a complete objection. After the provisional order for legal relief was rejected by the District Court of Sion and the cantonal instance, A.________ SA appealed in civil matters to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_1064/2025: Decision on the mootness of a cantonal appeal proceeding
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 on November 5, 2025, according to Art. 434 ZGB. The Cantonal Court declared the proceedings moot in a decision dated November 17, 2025, due to the transfer of the appellant 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.