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 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 portal of Lexplorer. There you can configure your newsletter, and you will receive the latest judgments tailored to your areas of law.
4A_226/2025: Judgment on the appeal against a TAS arbitration award in the context of international arbitration
Summary of the Facts
A Norwegian professional football player (appellant) terminated his employment contract with a Russian football club (respondent 1) due to the security situation in Russia during the Russian-Ukrainian war. The player then entered into a new contract with a Saudi Arabian football club (respondent 2). The Russian football club requested damages for breach of contract and a playing ban against the player from the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber. Following a corresponding decision from the FIFA DRC on November 15, 2023, the case was brought before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (TAS), which increased the amount of damages. The player filed a civil complaint with the Federal Court and requested the annulment of the TAS arbitration award.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1**: The Federal Court found that the appeal was admissible according to Art. 190-192 IPRG and Art. 77 para. 1 lit. a BGG in the area of international arbitration. It emphasized that the appeal is purely cassatory in nature and that the arbitral tribunal is based in Lausanne (E.2.1, E.2.2). **E.2**: The review is limited to violations of the material public policy according to Art. 190 para. 2 lit. e IPRG. The TAS's substantive assessment that the termination of the employment contract was unjustified did not contradict the principle of excessive binding according to Art. 27 ZGB nor the prohibition of forced labor. The arbitration tribunal concluded that the player had further options for action, such as being loaned to a third club (E.3.1 - E.3.5). **E.3**: The player's appeal that the arbitration award was contrary to the ECHR was dismissed. The Federal Court ruled that the arbitration was voluntarily submitted to and that there was no violation of fundamental rights such as Art. 2, 4 para. 2, 5 para. 1 or 8 ECHR (E.4.1 - E.4.2). **E.4**: The Federal Court also denied a violation of the material public policy in the outcome due to the TAS's damage calculation. It found that such was based on appropriate legal considerations and did not cause existentially threatening problems for the player (E.3.5).
Summary of the Dispositive
The player's appeal is dismissed. The court costs and compensation to the previous club are imposed on the player, while no compensation is awarded to the new club.
7B_924/2025: Appeal regarding the sealing of seized documents in criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, a self-employed nursing specialist and managing director of B.________ GmbH, is suspected of having committed various fraud offenses in the context of a criminal investigation by the Lucerne public prosecutor's office. Following house searches and seizures, documents and items were seized, the sealing of which was requested by A.________ and her father. The coercive measures court of the canton of Lucerne did not consider the unsealing request and granted the public prosecutor’s office the search of the seized items. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court against this decision.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines the admissibility of the appeal and notes that it is admissible under Art. 93 para. 1 lit. a BGG since an irreparable disadvantage threatens. The contested decision concerns the sealing procedure and is limited to an interim decision, which is why the appeal is to be admitted. The subject of the dispute only concerns the non-admission decision of the lower court and not the substantive assessment of the unsealing request. The Federal Court analyzes whether the appellant has sufficiently substantiated her sealing request. It concludes that the lower court has interpreted the requirements for the sealing request too strictly. As a self-employed nursing specialist, A.________ can invoke a professional secrecy according to Art. 171 para. 1 StPO. The protection of patient data was legally adequately presented, and the sealing should have been carried out. A violation of the requirement for expeditious proceedings is claimed by the appellant, but the Federal Court points out that no violation of the ECHR has been sufficiently substantiated. Moreover, the deadline according to Art. 248a para. 4 StPO is an order deadline.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal is upheld and the decision of the coercive measures court is overturned, with the matter being referred back to the lower court for the conduct of an unsealing procedure. Additionally, no court costs are imposed and a party compensation is addressed.
7B_41/2026: Inadmissibility of an appeal in the area of criminal law
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an appeal against the decision of the criminal chamber of the Court of Justice of the Republic and Canton of Geneva dated October 16, 2025, in which both an appeal for denial of justice and a request for the disqualification of the public prosecutor Pierre Bayenet were declared inadmissible. A.________ also requested free legal assistance.
Summary of the Considerations
According to Art. 100 para. 1 BGG, the deadline for filing an appeal is 30 days, starting from the day after the notification of the contested decision. The notification is assessed according to Art. 44 para. 2 BGG at the latest seven days after the first unsuccessful attempt at delivery. According to the shipping tracking, the contested decision was made available by Swiss Post on October 17, 2025, and could be picked up until October 24, 2025. According to Art. 44 para. 2 BGG, the notification is considered to have occurred on October 31, 2025. Therefore, the 30-day appeal period began on November 1, 2025, and ended on December 1, 2025. Since the appeal was only filed on January 9, 2026, it is late. The inadmissibility of the appeal is clear, which is why it was determined in the proceeding according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. a BGG.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was declared inadmissible and the request for free legal assistance was rejected. The court costs were imposed on the appellant.
2C_493/2025: Refusal to extend an EU/EFTA residence permit
Summary of the Facts
A Spanish national, A.________, who has been living in Switzerland since 2009 and has been predominantly dependent on social assistance since then, applied for the extension of his EU/EFTA residence permit, which expired in 2014. Due to his financial dependency and his limited professional integration, the extension was denied. A.________ lodged legal remedies up to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_635/2025: Federal Court judgment regarding the non-extension of a residence permit and expulsion from Switzerland
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________, originally from Cameroon, who lived in Switzerland due to family reunification, was not granted an extension of his residence permit. After separating and subsequently divorcing from his first wife and marrying a new partner in Cameroon, his continued stay in Switzerland became the subject of legal dispute. The responsible cantonal migration office and later the administrative court of the Canton of Bern refused to extend the residence permit. The appellant requested the Federal Court to overturn the lower court's judgment and grant the residence permit, citing personal hardship cases and claimed integration as well as international and national rights.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_49/2026: Decision on the suspensive effect in marriage protection proceedings
Summary of the Facts
In the context of a marriage protection procedure, the civil court of Basel-Landschaft East decided on a phased change of the custody arrangement towards alternating custody. The mother filed several requests based on a criminal complaint against the father, including the granting of suspensive effect and the introduction of a supervised visitation right. The Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft decided super-provisionally to suspend alternating custody and to establish a supervised visitation right, but later overturned these measures with a decision dated December 16, 2025, and postponed the enforceability of the first instance decision. The father filed an appeal in civil matters against this decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_411/2025: Judgment regarding provisional opening of legal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The respondent (B.________ GmbH) had submitted a request for provisional opening of legal proceedings in the amount of CHF 46,714.95 plus interest against the appellant (A.________) to the District Court of Winterthur. The District Court partially granted the opening of legal proceedings. The cantonal appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Zurich Court of Appeal, to the extent that it was admitted. The appellant subsequently filed a civil complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_189/2025: Judgment regarding referral to the Office for Property Valuation
Summary of the Facts
The Office for Property Valuation of the Canton of Graubünden had conducted an official valuation of the property of the appellants. The lower court found deficiencies in the conduct of the proceedings, but dismissed the appellants' complaint. The appellants objected to formal and substantive errors and the violation of their right to be heard.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_790/2025: Refusal to appoint an official defender in criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a Filipino citizen, has been unlawfully residing in Switzerland since the expiration of his residence permit in 2017 and was repeatedly urged to leave the country. His lawyer-supported application for a reassessment of his residence issue was rejected, and he was prosecuted criminally. In the context of the criminal proceedings, he requested the appointment of an official defender, which was denied by the responsible cantonal criminal authority.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_697/2025: Non-admission of the appeal regarding disability insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ requested a pension from the disability insurance at a disability degree of at least 70%. The lower court, the insurance court of the Canton of St. Gallen, instead awarded him a pension at a disability degree of 44%. The Federal Court did not admit the appeal because it did not meet the legal justification requirements according to Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG and did not address the substantive considerations of the lower court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7F_55/2025: Judgment regarding a revision request and a request for disqualification
Summary of the Facts
The applicant requested the revision of the judgment 7B_1167/2025 of November 17, 2025, in which the Federal Court had not admitted her appeal against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne regarding disqualification due to lack of sufficient justification. Additionally, she filed a request for disqualification against two Federal judges.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_805/2025: Judgment regarding the party status of the public prosecutor's office in the appeal procedure
Summary of the Facts
A criminal proceeding against three police officers for multiple attempted intentional homicide resulted in an acquittal by the Cantonal Court of Glarus. Private plaintiffs E.________ and F.________ filed an appeal. The Public and Youth Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Glarus was excluded from the appeal procedure by the President of the Cantonal Court of Glarus. The public prosecutor's office appealed to the Federal Court against this.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_757/2025: Decision regarding accident insurance and procedural requirements
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against the judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern, which denied his claim for a revision of the increase in the disability pension and a subsequent adjustment of the integrity compensation. The lower court did not diagnose any significant change in the accident-related health status or earning capacity that would justify an increase.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_990/2025: Decision regarding the appeal against the refusal to reopen the criminal investigation
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ requested the reopening of a criminal investigation closed in 2019 concerning allegations against her mother, sisters, and brother regarding breach of trust and fraud in connection with the administration of her deceased father's estate. The Geneva State Ministry rejected this request. The Chambre pénale de recours of the Court of Justice of the Canton of Geneva subsequently declared the appeal against this decision inadmissible.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_15/2026: Decision regarding the tax on value added in the Canton of Fribourg
Summary of the Facts
The owner A.________, owner of a property located in the Canton of Fribourg, was obliged by the cantonal tax authority to pay a tax on the value added. After the use of the property had changed, the Service cantonal des contributions of the Canton of Fribourg (SCC) set the tax at CHF 79,002. The cantonal court referred the matter back to the tax authority for renewed examination and calculation of the tax, and the appellant subsequently appealed to the Federal Court, requesting, among other things, the complete annulment of the decision regarding the tax on value added.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_601/2025: Appeal procedure regarding disability insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant (A.A.________), represented by A.B.________, filed an appeal against the judgment of the Insurance Court of the Canton of Solothurn dated October 7, 2025. The subject of the proceedings was disability insurance, with the appellant alleging a denial of justice by the lower court and the IV Office of Solothurn.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_228/2025: Decision on the admissibility of an appeal against a cantonal district court decision
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal on November 18, 2025, against the decision of the District Court of Werdenberg-Sarganserland dated November 17, 2025, which had granted the respondents (Canton of St. Gallen and Municipality of St. Margrethen) definitive legal opening in a debt collection case. The debt collection office Grabs-Gams informed the Federal Court on November 26, 2025, that the appellant had settled the claim that was under debt collection.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_630/2025: Appeal against the inadmissibility decision of the Cantonal Court of Fribourg in a disciplinary proceeding
Summary of the Facts
A.________ first contacted the Bar Commission of the Canton of Fribourg in writing with a request to initiate disciplinary proceedings against lawyer B.________, which was rejected. A subsequent request for revision was also dismissed. Subsequently, A.________ complained to the Cantonal Court of Fribourg, which declared the appeal inadmissible, as A.________, as the complainant, did not have standing in a disciplinary procedure against a lawyer.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_258/2025: Withdrawal of a transport company’s license due to the lack of honorability of the managing director
Summary of the Facts
A.________ Sàrl, a company based in U.________ for the purpose of student and passenger transport, applied in March 2024 for the renewal of its license as a transport company. The Federal Office for Transport (BAV) rejected the application because the managing director and transport manager of the company, B.________, was not considered honorable under the legislation due to a criminal conviction for defamation. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed this decision. The company appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_616/2025: Judgment regarding compliance with deadlines and justification of an appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant requested a party compensation from the respondent in connection with a lawsuit for wage replacement before the Cantonal Court of Lucerne. The Cantonal Court did not admit the appeal because the appellant did not provide the required security within the deadline. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Court against this decision, but it was submitted late and inadequately justified. Additionally, the appellant requested free legal assistance, which the Federal Court rejected.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_467/2025: Federal Court regarding the appeal concerning defamation
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was convicted by the Geneva Police Court for defamation. He published a video on YouTube claiming that B.B.________ had intentionally and planned to abduct his daughter, mentioning personal details. The court convicted him and denied compensation for the procedural costs. The appeal against the judgment was dismissed by the Geneva Court of Appeal, which imposed further procedural costs. A.________ then appealed to the Federal Court, demanding inter alia his acquittal.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_16/2026: Neutral decision regarding non-admission of an appeal in connection with the transfer from a correctional facility
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced to a prison term of 5 years and 8 months for multiple attempted (eventual) intentional homicide in excess of self-defense. During the appeal proceedings, his security detention was extended. A.________ requested to be transferred from the U.________ correctional facility to the cantonal prison in Zug, which the Cantonal Court of Lucerne rejected. With a handwritten submission, A.________ filed an appeal against the decision of the Cantonal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_463/2025: Declaration of invalidity of a last will – Appeal against a partial decision
Summary of the Facts
The statutory heir A.________ demands the declaration of invalidity and ineffectiveness of two last wills of the testator E.________. In the 2018 will, A.________ was excluded from the inheritance, and the respondents B.________, C.________, and the association D.________ were appointed as heirs. A.________'s claim before the District Court of Horgen to establish her status as an heir was dismissed. The Court of Appeal of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the appeal regarding the inheritance claims but continued the proceedings concerning the cost issues. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court against the alleged partial decision of the Court of Appeal.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1040/2025: Decision on issues of denial of justice and delay in criminal law
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ contacted the Federal Court on October 2, 2025, regarding alleged denial of justice and delay by the criminal chamber of the appeals chamber of the Canton of Geneva, as well as alleged violations of his fundamental rights by the public prosecutor's office of the Canton of Geneva. Additionally, he requested precautionary and super-provisional measures as well as implicitly the granting of free legal assistance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_1124/2025: Inadmissibility of the appeal regarding the declaration of bankruptcy
Summary of the Facts
B.________ requested the declaration of bankruptcy of A.________, which was pronounced by the District Court of Lugano on October 1, 2025. A.________ appealed against it. The cantonal instance found that A.________ had not made any procedural cost advances within the set deadlines and therefore declared the appeal inadmissible. A.________'s bankruptcy was re-declared as of November 28, 2025, at 10:00 AM. A.________ argued that he had not received any relevant delivery documents and the lack of opportunity for defense violated his right to a hearing.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_577/2025: Decision regarding disciplinary measures against a psychologist
Summary of the Facts
A psychologist (A.________), who was employed at a clinic in Geneva, was fined 5,000 CHF by the cantonal supervisory authority for violation of his professional duties. Specifically, he was accused of lacking transparency towards the mother of treated children regarding his delegation by another doctor (C.________) and failing to maintain proper documentation (no medical files for the treated children). The lower court (Chambre administrative of the Court of Justice of the Canton of Geneva) had dismissed the psychologist's appeal against this decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_470/2025: Decision regarding the question of summons and delivery of a payment request in the tax procedure
Summary of the Facts
The taxpayer A.________ requested the restoration of the deadline for a cost advance payment to the cantonal court of the Canton of Vaud. Her justification was based on alleged delivery problems by Swiss Post, which caused her to miss the deadline. The cantonal court rejected the request and declared the original appeal inadmissible.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_246/2025: Loan claim and burden of substantiation
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG demanded the repayment of a shareholder loan from former football advisor B.________, with a balance as of December 31, 2019, amounting to CHF 898,478.40. The District Court of Affoltern dismissed the claim due to inadequate substantiation, and the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Zurich confirmed this decision with a judgment dated April 22, 2025. The appellant considered the claims to be sufficiently substantiated and turned to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_212/2025: Withdrawal of the appeal regarding supplementary benefits for AHV/IV
Summary of the Facts
A.________, represented by his assistant B.________ and legally by Georg Merkl, filed an appeal against a judgment of the Insurance Court of the Canton of Solothurn dated February 28, 2025. The appeal concerned supplementary benefits for AHV/IV. In a letter dated January 19, 2026, A.________ withdrew this appeal.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_477/2024: Obligation of the Suva in the area of accident insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, reported a wrist injury to Suva following an alleged work accident on November 20, 2021. Suva retroactively ceased benefits as of May 12, 2022, due to reaching the medical final status. After an objection, Suva ultimately denied a claim for benefits, arguing that neither an accident nor an accident-like bodily injury was present. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed the appeal against this objection decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.