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 the 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.
4A_298/2025: Judgment on International Arbitration Concerning Settlement Agreement in the Employment of a Football Player
Summary of the Facts
A Venezuelan football player (respondent) and his former club (complainant) entered into two employment contracts and later a settlement agreement. After disagreements over salary claims, the competent chamber of the Venezuelan Football Federation (FVF) dismissed the player's claim. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (TAS) partially upheld the player's appeal and declared the settlement agreement null and void under Venezuelan labor law. The club appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1:** The judgment is issued according to Art. 54 para. 1 BGG in the language of the complaint, as the contested decision was written in Spanish.
**E.2:** In the context of international arbitration, the appeal in civil matters is admissible according to Art. 77 para. 1 lit. a BGG in conjunction with Art. 190–192 IPRG. The requirements of Chapter 12 of the IPRG were affirmed. The grounds for the complaint according to Art. 190 para. 2 IPRG are exhaustive and their justification is subject to strict requirements.
**E.3:** The complainant alleged a violation of the right to be heard (Art. 190 para. 2 lit. d IPRG), as the TAS referred to a regulation that was not mentioned in the previous proceedings and applied Venezuelan instead of Swiss law. The Federal Court considered the application of Venezuelan labor law to be expected due to the purely domestic reference of the contracting parties. The complaint was dismissed as unfounded.
**E.4:** The Federal Court found that the complaints of the complainant were partially inadmissible or inadequately justified.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint was dismissed and the court costs as well as compensation for the respondent were imposed on the complainant. The judgment will be communicated in writing to the parties and the TAS.
4A_190/2025: Judgment on Owner Liability
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, who was injured on a construction site on May 15, 2012, after falling from a scaffold, asserts owner liability and demands compensation and damages. The Federal Court reviewed the complainant's submissions against the judgment of the Aargau Cantonal Court, which had dismissed the appeal against the district court's dismissal of the claim in Rheinfelden. The main point of contention was the causal link between the unsecured scaffold pole and the accident.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court bases its judgment on the facts determined by the lower court and can only correct them if they are obviously incorrect or arbitrary. The lower court had significant doubts about the cause of the accident and concluded that the causal link between the unsecured scaffold pole and the accident was not predominantly probable. The complainant's description of the accident contains internal contradictions and is not coherent. The witness C.________'s statements also do not correspond with the complainant's account and are not consistent. The Federal Court pointed out the importance of the standard of proof of predominance of probability and examined whether the lower court's doubts regarding the alleged causality were justified. It found no arbitrariness in the lower court’s evaluation of evidence. Although the complainant rightly pointed out one issue (incorrect interpretation of the photograph by the lower court), this did not change the outcome, as the remaining doubts persisted and were decisive for the judgment.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint is dismissed, the court costs are imposed on the complainant, and no party compensation is awarded.
7B_1350/2025: Complaint Regarding the Extension of Pretrial Detention Due to Qualified Recidivism Risk
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of Basel-Stadt is conducting a criminal proceeding against A.________ on suspicion of attempted deprivation of liberty and kidnapping according to Art. 183 StGB. The coercive measures court of Basel-Stadt initially ordered pretrial detention and later extended it, against which the complainant filed a complaint. The Cantonal Court of Basel-Stadt dismissed the complaint, and A.________ turned to the Federal Court to request the lifting of the detention or alternative measures.
Summary of the Considerations
E. 1: The Federal Court declares the complaint in criminal matters admissible according to Art. 78 et seq. BGG. The complainant is entitled to appeal, and the prerequisites for the case are met. E. 2: Pretrial detention is admissible according to Art. 221 para. 1 StPO if there is urgent suspicion and a special reason for detention (e.g., qualified recidivism risk). Alternative measures may only be applied if they serve the same purpose. E. 3: Qualified recidivism risk according to Art. 221 para. 1bis StPO requires that the act has seriously impaired the physical, psychological, or sexual integrity of a person (lit. a) and there is a serious risk of committing a comparable serious crime again (lit. b). The Federal Court reviews the application of the law in the detention order freely, and questions of factual determination only in cases of obvious legal violations or errors. E. 4: The lower court correctly established the characteristics of qualified recidivism risk and severe psychological impairment of the victimized child. The act against the minor victim is to be classified objectively and situationally as a serious crime. Personal motives of the complainant and external fortunate circumstances do not change that. E. 5: The risk of recidivism was confirmed by a psychiatric preliminary report. The report indicated that the complainant heard voices and continued to suffer from an untreated psychosis, which poses an unacceptably high risk for further serious crimes. The lower court relied on convincing expert findings and supplementary facts. E. 6: A possible existence of excessive detention is rejected. Pretrial detention does not exceed the expected sanctions in time, even in the case of non-responsibility, as a freedom-restricting measure would still be possible. E. 7: The conditions of detention are not disproportionate. Medical care is adequately ensured, and the general and broad complaints made by the complainant do not meet the statutory requirements for substantiation.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint is dismissed, and the request for legal aid is granted. Court costs are not charged, and legal counsel is appointed and compensated.
4D_136/2025: Judgment Regarding Contract for Work
Summary of the Facts
A dispute between A.________ (complainant) and B.________ AG (respondent, formerly C.________ AG) concerns a claim for payment for sanitary work. The work was completed in 2016, but no payment was made by the complainant, who disputed both the basis of the claim and parts of the work performed. In the enforcement proceedings, CHF 28,080.-- was claimed, of which the complainant acknowledged CHF 6,603.39. The dispute led to decisions by the District Court of Kreuzlingen and the Cantonal Court of Thurgau, of which the latter partly did not consider the appeal of the complainant.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_185/2024: Judgment Regarding the Unsealing of a Mobile Phone in the Context of a Criminal Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office I of the Canton of Zurich is conducting a criminal investigation against the doctor A.________ on suspicion of multiple defilement and violation of privacy. During the investigation, the mobile phone of the accused was seized and sealed at his request. Subsequently, over several years, decisions were made regarding the unsealing and searching of the device at various instances, most recently with a decision from the District Court of Zurich, coercive measures court. The accused appealed against this decision, which was handled by the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1324/2024: Judgment on Restoration of Deadline and Dismissal of a Criminal Complaint
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was convicted by the District Court of Horgen for simple bodily injury and multiple threats to a conditional fine. The Cantonal Court of Zurich confirmed the judgment. A.________ filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Court and requested, among other things, the restoration of the missed complaint deadline.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_691/2025: Proceedings Regarding the Referendum on the "Citizen-Service Initiative" are Declared Irrelevant
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, Boris Etter, filed a voting complaint with the government of the Canton of Zurich before the federal referendum on November 30, 2025, regarding the "Citizen-Service Initiative," which was not addressed on November 19, 2025. After the initiative was rejected, the complainant maintained in a complaint to the Federal Court the invalidation of the vote and the determination of a violation of Art. 34 para. 2 BV, despite the obvious irrelevance of the legal request concerning the postponement of the vote.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1282/2025: Judgment on Preventive Detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is being prosecuted for various offenses, including qualified violations of the narcotics law, serious money laundering, violations of the road traffic law, as well as the foreign and integration law. He has been in pretrial detention since 2021 and has been in early imprisonment since February 2023. The lower courts confirmed the detention due to flight risk and lack of suitable alternative measures.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4D_225/2025: Inadmissibility of a Complaint Due to Inadequate Justification
Summary of the Facts
The complainant requested payment of EUR 6,800, CHF 7,000 (each plus interest), as well as damages of at least CHF 1,000 before the Regional Court of Oberland. This claim was dismissed on January 6, 2025. The appeal against this judgment was dismissed by the Cantonal Court of Bern on October 13, 2025, insofar as it was addressed. The complainant submitted a complaint to the Federal Court on November 15, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_887/2025: Dismissal of a Complaint Due to Non-Payment of Costs
Summary of the Facts
The complaint was directed against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Zurich dated September 23, 2025. The complainant was, among other things, required to pay a cost advance of CHF 800 by December 1, 2025. Despite extensive notifications, this was not done.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1104/2025: Decision Regarding the Non-Prosecution Order
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a report/criminal complaint on June 11, 2025, after which the deputy attorney general of the Canton of Ticino issued a non-prosecution order on June 26, 2025. The president of the complaints chamber of the criminal court of the Canton of Ticino declared the complaint filed against it as late and thus inadmissible on September 9, 2025. A.________ subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court on October 7, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_798/2025: Dismissal of the Complaint Due to Inadmissibility
Summary of the Facts
A.________ accused his brother B.________ of defaming him on October 26, 2020, which led to the initiation of a criminal proceeding. The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Ticino issued a criminal order on January 30, 2024, which included a conditional fine, a fine, and substitute imprisonment. After the accused objected, the president of the criminal court practice declared the proceeding closed on May 20, 2025, due to statute of limitations. The Cantonal Court of Ticino confirmed this decision on July 4, 2025. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_240/2025: Supplementary Benefits for AHV/IV: Waiver of Assets
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, applied for supplementary benefits (EL) for AHV in 2024. The compensation fund Schwyz denied the claim due to a waiver of assets (unsubstantiated asset declines between 2008 and 2022, as well as payments to a third party without consideration), thus exceeding the applicable asset threshold. After an unsuccessful objection procedure, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz dismissed the complainant's appeal. In a complaint to the Federal Court, A.________ requested the annulment of the lower court's decision and the remittance for a recalculation of the EL claim without considering a waiver of assets or, alternatively, a supplementary clarification.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_869/2025: Decision Regarding Withdrawal of a Complaint About the Non-Prosecution of a Proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (Association A.________), represented by attorney Dr. Carol Wiedmer-Scheidegger, filed a complaint against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Zurich, III. Criminal Chamber, dated August 7, 2025. In a submission dated December 27, 2025 (received on December 29, 2025), the complainant withdrew this complaint. The subject of the original complaint procedure was the non-prosecution of a criminal proceeding.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_650/2025: Compensation for Public Defense, Right to be Heard, and Arbitrariness in the Context of Criminal Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The Regional Court of Berner Jura-Seeland acquitted the accused person of all charges in February 2024 and set compensation for public defense. The Cantonal Court of Bern reduced the originally awarded compensation in the appeal procedure. The public defense then contested this with a complaint to the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_266/2025: Judgment Regarding Surety Obligations and Their Impact on Passive Legitimacy
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (A.________) undertook in 2015 as a joint surety for the claims of the respondent (B.________ AG) from a credit framework agreement of CHF 300,000. After the dissolution of the main debtor (D.________ AG) in 2017, the respondent claimed the surety but failed in an initial procedure, as the prerequisites of Art. 496 para. 1 OR were not met. In a second procedure in 2022, the respondent filed a lawsuit again, after the main debtor was bankrupt and the prerequisites of Art. 496 para. 1 OR were now met.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_546/2025: Decision on Granting Benefits of Disability Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, born in 1974, submitted several applications for disability insurance benefits between 2014 and 2021, which were either rejected or not addressed. In May 2024, she submitted another application for benefits, which was rejected by the cantonal office for disability insurance with a decision dated October 29, 2024. The cantonal court dismissed her appeal against this on August 21, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1292/2025: Decision on the Extension of Pretrial Detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was accused in connection with an investigation concerning the possession of explosives for the purpose of blowing up an ATM. He has been in pretrial detention since December 2024. The multiple extensions of pretrial detention by the coercive measures court and the complaints chamber of the Federal Criminal Court were challenged.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_331/2025: Judgment on Application for Legal Aid in Connection with a Disability Insurance Matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the rejection of his application for legal aid by the Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich. The cantonal court deemed the complainant's neediness insufficiently substantiated, as he submitted a form essentially left blank.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_634/2025: Withdrawal of the Complaint in the Area of Unemployment Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complaint of A.________ against the decision of the Social Insurance Court of the Cantonal Tribunal of Vaud dated October 6, 2025, concerning unemployment insurance, was withdrawn by letter from the complainant dated December 9, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_390/2025: Taxation of A.________ AG: Double Taxation and Location of Actual Management
Summary of the Facts
The dispute concerns the unlimited tax liability of A.________ AG in the Canton of Ticino for the tax periods 2017–2022. The cantonal tax administration of Ticino argued that the actual management of the company took place in Ticino, as a main employee and indirect shareholder was registered there. The lower court confirmed this view for all mentioned tax periods. The complainant requested a full or partial annulment of the taxation in Ticino before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4D_237/2025: Judgment Regarding the Dismissal of the Complaint in a Debt Enforcement Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (A.________ GmbH) filed a complaint against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Basel-Stadt dated October 23, 2025, which had dismissed her complaint in a debt enforcement procedure.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_22/2025: Granting of the Complaint Regarding Unemployment Compensation
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, a former National Councilor, registered as unemployed after her electoral defeat for the 2023–2027 term. Her claim for unemployment compensation was suspended by the Office cantonal de l'emploi (OCE) for 9 days, as she could not demonstrate sufficient job-seeking efforts prior to her registration in November 2023. The lower court dismissed her legal remedy, leading to the complaint to the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_36/2025: Judgment on an Insurance Contract
Summary of the Facts
The Aa.________ AG (complainant) operates reinsurance and belongs to Ab.________ AG (Austria). In 2018, an art theft occurred, during which a painting was stolen and later found damaged. Disputes arose over the depreciation of the painting between the primary insurer and the owners of this painting. The Aa.________ AG is the reinsurer of the primary insurance and in turn a retrocessionaire to several insurers of the Lloyd’s market (respondents). The subject of the dispute is whether the retrocessionaires can be held liable for payments made by the reinsurance to the primary insurance allegedly in the context of an internal group settlement.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_104/2025: Provisional Legal Enforcement
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ AG (complainant) and the B.________ AG (respondent) entered into several credit framework contracts. The complainant terminated these as of December 31, 2022, stating an outstanding amount of CHF 18,377,500.--. After non-payment, the respondent initiated enforcement proceedings for CHF 17,457,500.--. Subsequently, the District Court of Arbon and the Cantonal Court of Thurgau granted the respondent provisional legal enforcement.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.