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 with facts, considerations, and dispositives. 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.
9C_349/2025: Judgment regarding tax domicile and income allocation
Summary of the Facts
A.________, residing in U.________/ZH, declared self-employed income for the tax period 2019 and claimed that the center of his business activities was in V.________/SZ, where only minimal infrastructure for a business establishment was maintained. The lower courts denied the allocation of income from self-employment in V.________ and assessed it entirely in Zurich.
Summary of the Considerations
E.1: The legal framework for reviewing complaints in public law matters and the scope of cognition of the Federal Court is presented. It is established that the lower court made its findings of fact correctly and did not act obviously incorrectly or arbitrarily. E.2.1: The request for the determination of taxable income according to the values of the lower courts is not considered due to lack of legal interest. E.2.3: Only the allocation of income from self-employment in V.________ is examined materially. E.3: The legal framework for inter-cantonal tax liability and tax allocation is interpreted. It is emphasized that a business establishment at an out-of-canton business location requires permanent establishments that constitute the center of business activity. E.4: The previous practice regarding allocation to the canton of Schwyz in relation to V.________ is presented, which was previously referred to by the tax administration of Schwyz as a fictitious domicile. E.5: Fundamental objections of the complainant against the admissibility of the re-examination of the business location by the lower court are legally refuted. It is established that no trust protection regulation or other obstacles stand in the way of a re-evaluation. E.6: The lower court extensively reasons that the facilities in V.________ are not sufficient for a business location and that the center of activity is rather at the complainant's residence. The considerations are fundamentally based on the actual circumstances regarding use and infrastructure. E.7: The complaint is entirely rejected due to lack of legal basis for the allocation of self-employed income in V.________.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complainant's appeal is rejected, and the court costs are imposed on him. The judgment is communicated to the affected parties and institutions.
2D_23/2025: Judgment on jurisdiction in connection with a cultural promotion application from the Swisslos Fund
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court after the government council of the canton of Solothurn rejected her cultural promotion application from the Swisslos Fund. Among other things, she requested the determination of a violation of the guarantee of legal recourse and the referral of the case to the Administrative Court of the canton of Solothurn. The Federal Court examined its jurisdiction and found that the cantonal legal remedies were not exhausted. It referred the complaint to the Administrative Court of the canton of Solothurn for jurisdictional purposes.
Summary of the Considerations
The complainant submitted a request for cultural promotion to the Swisslos Fund of the canton of Solothurn, which was initially rejected and later dismissed following an appeal. The government council of the canton of Solothurn rejected the application and informed about the possibility of an appeal to the Administrative Court, which the complainant questioned. The subsidiary constitutional complaint to the Federal Court aimed to clarify the guarantee of legal recourse and the jurisdiction of the Administrative Court. The Federal Court examined the admissibility of the subsidiary constitutional complaint and found that the cantonal legal remedies had not been exhausted. The statement from the Administrative Court confirmed that the legal remedies information from the government council was correct and that the Administrative Court must be seen as competent to assess the complaint. A direct appeal to the Federal Court is not provided for. Due to the failure to exhaust the cantonal legal remedies, the Federal Court did not consider the complaint but referred the submission for jurisdictional purposes to the Administrative Court of Solothurn.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Court did not consider the complaint and referred the submission to the Administrative Court of the canton of Solothurn. No court costs were incurred, and there were no party compensation payments.
2F_30/2025: Judgment on a request for revision regarding denial of justice
Summary of the Facts
Three applicants (A.________ AG, B.________ GmbH, and C.________ SA) requested the Federal Court to revise a Federal Court judgment from November 25, 2025 (2C_330/2025). They claimed that the court had established a ground for revision under Art. 121 lit. a BGG due to an alleged change in practice without the legally required five-member composition. The subject of the original proceedings was a denial of justice by the Federal Administrative Court in connection with seized assets in the case "Gulnara Karimova et al."
Summary of the Considerations
- **E. 1**: The circumstances and concerns of the applicants as well as the preliminary proceedings were reported in detail. The Federal Court had partially not considered the complaint in the original judgment because the deadline for an interim decision from the Federal Administrative Court (of November 29, 2023) had expired. - **E. 2.1**: The Federal Court explains the requirements for revision under Art. 121-123 BGG and emphasizes that a ground for revision must be concretely and legally adequately substantiated. - **E. 2.2**: The applicants refer to Art. 121 lit. a BGG and claim a violation of the provisions regarding the composition of the court due to an alleged change in practice. - **E. 2.3**: The applicants do not address the rejection of their declaration requests in the original judgment and neglect the legal justification of the alleged grounds for revision. - **E. 2.4**: Since the applicants have not sufficiently challenged the specific ground for non-consideration of judgment 2C_330/2025, their request for revision is inadmissible.
Summary of the Dispositive
The request for revision is deemed inadmissible. The applicants are imposed court costs without party compensation.
8C_650/2025: Complaint regarding supplementary benefits to AHV/IV
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against the decision of the Social Insurance Court of the canton of Zurich from September 16, 2025, which had not considered the complaint against the decision of the Social Insurance Institution of the canton of Zurich from June 23, 2025. The subject of the dispute was supplementary benefits to AHV/IV.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_488/2023: Decision on party compensation in connection with operating licenses for FV-Dosto trains
Summary of the Facts
Inclusion Handicap filed a complaint against temporary operating licenses for long-distance double-decker trains (FV-Dosto) of the SBB, criticizing their accessibility for disabled persons. During the complaint proceedings before the Federal Administrative Court, there was a partial out-of-court settlement. The dispute regarding the ramp inclination was later decided by the Federal Court in favor of Inclusion Handicap, with the Federal Court referring the issue of party compensation back to the Federal Administrative Court for re-regulation. In the renewed decision, the Federal Administrative Court reduced the amount of party compensation for the SBB and the intervenor Alstom. This re-regulation was contested before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_153/2025: Building permit for a photovoltaic system in the ISOS area
Summary of the Facts
The cooperative A.________ plans to construct a photovoltaic system on a building located in the core zone of the city of Winterthur and within the perimeter of the ISOS with preservation objective A. Following an appeal by the Zurich Heritage Protection ZVH, the building permit was partially revoked by the Building Appeal Court and the matter was referred back for further clarification of facts, particularly to obtain a statement from the cantonal specialist office regarding the necessity of an expert report from the EKD or ENHK. The Administrative Court of the canton of Zurich confirmed this decision. The city of Winterthur then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_36/2026: Judgment on a complaint regarding measures in divorce proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.________ (husband) and B.________ (wife) have been married since 2010 and have two children together. The spouses separated in 2017, and multiple decisions were made regarding measures to protect the marital community. After the husband filed for divorce, he requested measures in February 2025 according to Art. 276 ZPO, particularly alternating custody of the children and consideration of a hypothetical income of his wife. The request was rejected by the civil court, and the maintenance contributions were adjusted. The husband's appeal was dismissed by the Appeals Chamber of the Neuchâtel District Court in November 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_797/2024: Decision on the suspension of early coercive measures and reversion to early prison sentence
Summary of the Facts
A.________ had been in pre-trial detention since November 2, 2020, later in early prison sentence, and ultimately in early coercive measures in a stationary addiction treatment center. The District Court of Rheinfelden had ordered a prison sentence and stationary addiction treatment according to Art. 60 para. 4 StGB. Following an appeal by the public prosecutor's office, the early coercive measures were lifted by the High Court of the canton of Aargau, as the maximum duration of the stationary measure might have been exceeded. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against this order.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_1104/2025: Complaint regarding denial of justice concerning enforcement supervision
Summary of the Facts
The complainant criticizes an alleged denial of justice by the High Court of the canton of Aargau as the upper enforcement supervisory authority. She specifically criticizes the forwarding of her submissions to the lower supervisory authority (District Court of Lenzburg) and raises allegations of institutional bias and lack of supervision by High Judge Holliger. Furthermore, she objected to the signature of the president on a letter from the II. civil law department. The procedure fundamentally concerns the question of whether the High Court failed to issue a contestable decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_107/2024: Dispute over date of birth entry in the Central Migration Information System (ZEMIS)
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, a national from Sierra Leone, applied for asylum and stated her date of birth as October 15, 2006, to identify herself as a minor. An age assessment by the Institute of Forensic Medicine at the University of Bern confirmed her majority, estimated her minimum age at 26.7 years, and indicated an average age of 21.4–33.1 years. The State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) subsequently changed her date of birth in ZEMIS to January 1, 1997, and added a note of dispute. The complainant unsuccessfully appealed this change to the Federal Administrative Court and then took the case to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1278/2025: Dismissal of proceedings after unconditional withdrawal of complaints
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed complaints in various proceedings against decisions of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne. By submission dated January 7, 2026, the complainant unconditionally withdrew all pending proceedings.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7F_43/2025: Judgment regarding revision request
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ submitted a revision request against the Federal Court judgment 7B_491/2025 of July 21, 2025. This judgment was a decision of non-consideration concerning a complaint against a resolution of the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft. The applicant requested, as part of his revision request, the annulment of the judgment and the referral to what he considered an unbiased chamber, as well as free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_17/2026: International legal assistance in criminal matters: Complaint regarding the surrender of evidence
Summary of the Facts
The judgment deals with a complaint in public law matters against legal assistance to Ukraine, which requests the surrender of documents related to accounts of A.________ AB at Bank C.________ AG. The Federal Criminal Court had dismissed the complaint against the final decision of the Federal Office of Justice. The complainant requests the dismissal of the request for legal assistance or a re-evaluation by the lower court, while the Federal Court declared the complaint inadmissible.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_227/2025: Decision regarding attachment opposition
Summary of the Facts
B.________, C.________, and D.________, the legal heirs of E.________, requested an attachment on the assets of the deceased's ex-husband, A.________, at Bank G.________ in Zurich. They relied on outstanding maintenance payments and community property settlement claims that, according to the divorce agreement, had fallen into the estate. The attachment was approved in the first instance, and the opposition filed by A.________ and the subsequent appeal were dismissed. A.________ filed a civil complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_838/2024: Spousal support and asset issues after divorce
Summary of the Facts
The judgment concerns a divorce dispute between A.________ and B.________, who arranged their marital situation following the adoption of the separation of property regime in 2001 and their separation in December 2016. It involves, among other things, the determination of claims concerning the distribution of assets, maintenance, and settlement after divorce. Two complaints were brought forward, one by A.________ and the other by B.________, with opposing requests regarding asset issues and legal costs.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1322/2025: Order regarding disqualification and withdrawal of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters against a decision of the High Court of the canton of Zug from October 31, 2025, regarding disqualification. The legal representation of A.________ declared on January 6, 2026, the withdrawal of the complaint, rendering the procedure moot.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_647/2025: Dismissal of proceedings due to withdrawal of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ GmbH filed a complaint against a decision of the Administrative Court of the canton of Zurich from September 25, 2025, in a public law matter with the Federal Court. The decision concerned a non-consideration of a complaint regarding the cantonal water regulation of the government council of Zurich. On January 13, 2026, the complainant withdrew her complaint.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_102/2025: Dispute over the obligation to pay a replacement fee for emergency services in St. Gallen
Summary of the Facts
The Medical Association of the canton of St. Gallen obliges medical personnel who do not participate in emergency services to pay a replacement fee. Dr. med. A.________, who works as a pathologist in an institute, applied for an exemption from the replacement fee for the year 2020. His application was rejected by the responsible medical circles. Following a procedure before the cantonal health department, the obligation to pay the replacement fee was upheld. The Administrative Court of the canton of St. Gallen subsequently accepted a complaint from Dr. med. A.________ and ruled that the legal basis for the obligation to pay the replacement fee was not sufficiently defined. The Medical Association then appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_420/2025: Decision regarding withdrawal of a complaint in a civil matter
Summary of the Facts
The complainants A.________ and B.________ filed a complaint in civil matters on September 3, 2025, against a decision of the Civil Appeals Court of the Cantonal Court of Vaud from June 30, 2025. However, during the proceedings, they communicated by letter dated December 19, 2025, that they had reached an out-of-court settlement with the opposing party, C.________, and were withdrawing their legal remedy.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_106/2024: Review of the date of birth in the Central Migration Information System (ZEMIS)
Summary of the Facts
A national from Sierra Leone, A.________, applied for asylum in Switzerland and claimed to be a minor. The State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) conducted an age assessment that confirmed his majority. The authority subsequently changed his date of birth in the Central Migration Information System (ZEMIS) to January 1, 2002. A.________ contested this decision but was rejected by both the Federal Administrative Court and the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_549/2025: Non-admission of the complaint regarding definitive legal opening
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against the decision of the High Court of the canton of Zurich from September 18, 2025, which confirmed the granting of definitive legal opening for CHF 33,000 plus interest.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_727/2025: Decision regarding incomplete delivery of a decision by the Federal Administrative Court
Summary of the Facts
A.________ complained about an allegedly faulty delivery by the Vaud Real Estate Chamber. The Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner rejected the opening of a formal investigation. Before the Federal Administrative Court (TAF), the complainant requested a decision on this matter, arguing that the decision of the TAF of November 11, 2025, was incomplete and incorrectly delivered, leading to an allegation of legal delay. The TAF had requested an advance payment of 1,000 Swiss francs in its decision of November 11, 2025, but it turned out that the delivery was faulty and the second page of the decision was missing.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_585/2025: Judgment regarding attachment opposition
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (A.________) contests the attachment decision of the High Court of the canton of Zurich, which resulted from a tax refund claim and an inheritance reduction claim. The points of contention are the due date of the attachment claim and the active legitimacy of the opposing parties.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1113/2025: Decision on the admissibility of the complaint regarding voluntary crime-oriented therapy
Summary of the Facts
The respondent A.________ was sentenced to life imprisonment and preventive detention for serious offenses. In 2024, he requested permission from the Office for Criminal Justice to undergo voluntary crime-oriented therapy. After rejection by the Office for Criminal Justice and the Department of Economy and Internal Affairs, the Administrative Court of the canton of Aargau partially granted the request. The Public Prosecutor's Office of the canton of Aargau then appealed in criminal matters to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_657/2025: Judgment on definitive legal opening
Summary of the Facts
The complainant contested the dismissal of his complaint regarding a legal opening decision. The Cantonal Court of St. Gallen had rejected a prior complaint against a decision of the single judge at the District Court of Rheintal from August 14, 2025. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court and requested, among other things, suspensive effect and free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_814/2025: Approval of a discovery in the criminal procedure
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of Basel-Landschaft conducted a criminal procedure against A.________ on suspicion of qualified violation of the Narcotics Act. A discovery from surveillance, originally conducted by Vaud law enforcement authorities, was approved by the coercive measures court. The complainant challenged this decision only in 2025, after which the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft dismissed the complaint as tardy. A.________ filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_346/2025: Revocation of the residence permit and expulsion from Switzerland
Summary of the Facts
The Serbian national A.A.________ received a residence permit in Switzerland due to his marriage to a German national E.________. During this marriage, A.A.________ maintained a permanent relationship with his first wife B.A.________ and had two children with her. After separating from E.________, he unsuccessfully applied for family reunification for B.A.________ and their son G.A.________ and remarried B.A.________. Following various offenses, including criminality, debts, and temporary reliance on social assistance, the Migration Office of Solothurn revoked his residence permit in 2024 and ordered his expulsion.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_722/2025: Decision regarding the revocation of permits and non-consideration decision
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________, a national from North Macedonia, had been living in Switzerland since 2013 and held a settlement permit. In 2021, family reunification for his sons C.A.________ and D.A.________ was approved, with D.A.________ receiving a settlement permit and C.A.________ a residence permit. Following police investigations and an anonymous tip regarding violations of immigration law, A.A.________'s former wife and current complainant B.A.________ (formerly B.B.________) was expelled. Despite a renewed marriage between A.A.________ and B.A.________ in August 2023, the Migration Office revoked the family's permits. A late appeal submitted was not accepted by the Security Directorate of the canton of Zurich, and the Administrative Court confirmed this non-consideration decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_746/2025: Decision regarding the transport of professional persons and jurisdiction
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ SA, a company for professional passenger transport (VTC and taxi) based in Geneva, filed a complaint with the Federal Court against an alleged administrative practice of the canton of Geneva. The complaint focused on the argument that the company was not subject to federal legislation on employment placement and personnel leasing (LSE) and requested various determinations from the Federal Court. A specific contested decision from a final cantonal instance was not presented.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_732/2025: Non-renewal of the EU/EFTA residence permit and expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, an Italian national and husband of a Swiss citizen with three children together, moved to Switzerland in 2015 and received social assistance benefits of over 500,000 francs. He had never been employed, and his applications for disability benefits were rejected due to lack of recognition of permanent incapacity for work. After a change of residence, the Office for Population and Migration of the canton of Fribourg refused to renew his EU/EFTA residence permit and ordered his expulsion. A complaint against this decision was dismissed by the cantonal court of Fribourg.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_348/2025: Claim for benefits from accident insurance for traumatic brain and cervical spine injury
Summary of the Facts
The insured suffered a traumatic brain and cervical spine injury as well as other symptoms such as balance disorders and cognitive impairments in two accidents in 2016. CNA discontinued benefits as of February 28, 2022, as it believed there was no causal connection. The cantonal court partially upheld the insured's complaint and ordered further investigations.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_13/2026: Decision on the non-renewal of a residence permit and the reconsideration request
Summary of the Facts
The complainants, nationals from Kosovo and long-term residents in Switzerland, lost their settlement permits due to reliance on social assistance and subsequently received residence permits. After these were not renewed, they applied again for their issuance, referring to retroactively granted disability pensions. The government council and the cantonal court of Basel-Landschaft rejected their legal remedies.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_94/2025: Non-consideration of a complaint submitted by fax according to formal requirements
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint on January 5, 2025, against the decision of the IV Office Bern from November 22, 2024, with the Administrative Court of the canton of Bern. This submission was made by fax, which under the case law does not have a timely effect, as the personal signature is missing. Despite a request for correction by the lower court, A.________ again submitted a document by fax. The lower court did not consider the complaint on January 14, 2025. A.________ appealed this decision to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_708/2025: Revision of the law on civil and criminal proceedings in the canton of Thurgau
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint on November 25, 2025, in public law matters against the amendment of the law on civil and criminal proceedings (ZSRG) of the canton of Thurgau, as it restricts the voting rights of the people for peace and district judges.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_620/2025: Judgment of the Swiss Federal Court on liability law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant claimed damages in a liability case, which is supposed to be related to the eviction of a property inhabited by her and her husband. The Civil Court of the canton of Basel-Stadt did not consider this claim by decision of July 14, 2025. The Appeals Court of the canton of Basel-Stadt dismissed an appeal against this decision on November 25, 2025, to the extent it considered it, and also did not consider a similar complaint of legal delay by the complainant against the Civil Court. The complainant subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court, which was classified as obviously inadmissible.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_718/2025: Non-processing of a complaint regarding residence permit
Summary of the Facts
The complainant's residence permit was revoked. She unsuccessfully appealed this decision to the Administrative Court of the canton of Aargau. Due to formal deficiencies, the court did not consider the complaint. The complainant then turned to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1380/2025: Decision on the extension of pre-trial detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a Swiss person under guardianship and administrative assistance, has been in pre-trial detention since July 10, 2025, due to numerous criminally relevant allegations. He is accused of threats, defamation, property damage, and theft, some of which he has partially admitted. The detention has been extended multiple times by cantonal authorities. The complainant requested before the Federal Court, among other things, his immediate release and financial compensation for his physical and mental damage.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1426/2025: Judgment regarding the extension of pre-trial detention and official defense
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ is in pre-trial detention based on a decision by the coercive measures court of the canton of Lucerne. Its extension until February 27, 2026, was ordered. The complainant appealed this decision before the Cantonal Court of Lucerne, which did not consider the appeal or dismissed it. Thereafter, the complainant appealed to the Federal Court in criminal matters and criticized, among other things, the extension of pre-trial detention and the official defense.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_662/2025: Decision on the securing of party costs
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was ordered by the judge of the cantonal asset chamber of the canton of Vaud to provide a security of CHF 30,000 in favor of B.________ S.A. to cover party costs. The reason was the credible insolvency of A.________ and the application of Art. 99 ZPO, which only grants the defendant the right to request such security. The cantonal appellate authority declared the appeal filed by A.________ against this decision inadmissible due to insufficient reasoning.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.