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 dispositions. 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.
1C_701/2025: Complaint against international legal assistance in criminal matters regarding assets in Switzerland
Summary of the Facts
This case involves a request for legal assistance from the Italian authorities to Switzerland, demanding the release of assets for the purpose of confiscation within a criminal proceeding. The assets are held in an account at a Swiss bank owned by a limited company. The Italian authorities rely on allegations of suspected embezzlement, investment fraud, and money laundering. The Federal Criminal Court dismissed a complaint filed against this; the company now turns to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines whether a case falls under the provisions of Art. 84 BGG. The access restrictions of Art. 84 BGG are intended to ensure that only particularly important cases are addressed by the Federal Court. The lower court correctly weighed that the relevant Italian decree on asset confiscation does not violate the ECHR. Italian legislation also permits such measures irrespective of a criminal conviction, provided there are sufficient indications of illegal origin of the assets. The company could not convincingly demonstrate that the arguments it presented render the case a "particularly important" one within the meaning of Art. 84 BGG. A parallel appeal to the European Court of Human Rights confirms the valid legal avenues and supports the Federal Criminal Court's view. The proceedings before the Federal Court are not classified as "particularly important," thus the substantive allegations will not be examined in depth.
Summary of the Disposition
The Federal Court declares the complaint inadmissible and imposes court costs of CHF 2,000 on the complainant. The decision will be communicated to the relevant parties and authorities.
7B_1314/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint regarding the postponement of a criminal deportation
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an appeal against the decision of the Service de la population of the Canton of Vaud (SPOP) dated July 23, 2025, which refused to postpone the criminal deportation. The Cantonal Court of Vaud, Administrative and Public Law Division, dismissed the appeal with a decision dated October 31, 2025. A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court on November 26, 2025.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The deadline for complaints according to Art. 100 para. 1 BGG is 30 days and cannot be extended. The complaint was filed within the deadline, but an "additional deadline extension" for supplementing the submission cannot be granted by law.
- **E.2:** The appointment of an official representative by the Federal Court according to Art. 41 para. 1 BGG requires the complete incapacity of the party to act independently. These conditions are not met, as no sufficient circumstances have been presented.
- **E.3.1:** The complaint must precisely and substantively justify the legal violation by the cantonal decision (Art. 42 para. 2 BGG).
- **E.3.2:** A.________ could not establish a connection to the legal considerations of the cantonal decision or sufficiently demonstrate the alleged legal violation.
- **E.3.3:** Due to inadequate justification, the complaint is deemed obviously inadmissible and is treated in a simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG.
- **E.4:** No court costs are incurred, thus the examination of the application for free legal aid for this point is unnecessary. The request for the appointment of an official representative is denied, as there were no chances of success.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint was declared inadmissible, no court costs were incurred, and the application for free legal aid was rejected.
8F_14/2025: Rejection of a request for revision in the field of disability insurance
Summary of the Facts
The insured A.________ requested a revision of a judgment of the Federal Court dated August 4, 2025, arguing that certain findings of the regional medical service were not considered and that the previous decisions were erroneous. The Federal Court examined whether the conditions for a revision based on Arts. 121-123 BGG were met.
Summary of the Considerations
According to Art. 61 BGG, decisions of the Federal Court are generally final, with a revision only possible in the defined exceptional cases of Arts. 121 to 123 BGG. In a decision based on inadmissibility, the legal force is limited to the question of the non-admission of the legal remedy. The insured did not present a specific and admissible reason for revision, such as newly discovered facts that could not have been previously asserted (Art. 123 para. 2 lit. a BGG) or obvious errors (Art. 121 lit. d BGG). Instead, she sought to retroactively supplement her insufficient original complaint justification with new arguments. However, such new motives do not fall under the grounds for revision of Arts. 121 et seq. BGG. The conditions for a revision were not met, and therefore the revision was denied, and the applicant was imposed with costs.
Summary of the Disposition
The request for revision is rejected, the court costs are imposed on the applicant, and the judgment will be communicated to the relevant parties.
1C_692/2025: Withdrawal of driver’s license due to deadline calculation
Summary of the Facts
The Cantonal Vehicle Office of the Canton of Geneva revoked A.________'s driver’s license for three months on February 13, 2025, due to a speeding violation. The delivery was made by postal service A+ and was deposited in his mailbox on February 14, 2025. A.________ filed a complaint with the Tribunal administratif de première instance (TAPI) on March 24, 2025, arguing that a delivery period of one week should be applied analogous to registered mail. The TAPI declared the complaint as late and therefore inadmissible. The Administrative Chamber of the Cour de justice dismissed the complaint on October 14, 2025, as the deadline began to run according to the applicable law from the day after delivery.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_1048/2025: No action on the complaint regarding the extension of a protective placement
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a minor with severe autism and a developmental level of a three-year-old child, was placed in a protective facility after the termination of his residential placement at the end of July 2025. The KESB Circle Liestal extended the measure on September 15, 2025, "for an indefinite period." The Baselland Psychiatry and the mother of A.________ subsequently filed complaints, which were dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft. The PBL as the complainant filed a complaint in civil matters with the Federal Court, specifically requesting the cancellation of the protective placement.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_537/2024: No action on the complaint
Summary of the Facts
This case concerns the granting of a building permit for the transformation of an existing mobile phone facility on a plot in the municipality of Meyrin, which is owned by the F.________ Foundation. The permit was granted by the Department of Territory of the Canton of Geneva on March 9, 2022, and subsequently confirmed in a proceeding by the Administrative Court of First Instance on October 12, 2023. A complaint by the municipality of Meyrin and several private individuals against this judgment was dismissed by the Administrative Court Chamber of the Geneva Cour de justice on July 23, 2024. The complainants then filed a complaint to the Federal Court, but withdrew it before the decision of the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1059/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint and rejection of the application for free legal aid
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint against a refusal to accept a decision dated May 7, 2025, issued by the District Attorney of Lausanne. The complaint was declared inadmissible by the Criminal Appeals Chamber of the Vaud Cantonal Court with a decision dated September 9, 2025, since the complainant had not paid the advance costs within the set deadline. A.________ subsequently filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court on October 6, 2025, and also requested free legal aid.