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 dispositive parts. For the other 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.
5A_157/2026: Decision regarding free legal aid in connection with appeal for child support
Summary of the Facts
The appellant requests free legal aid for an appeal procedure against a modification of his divorce judgment, which increased the maintenance contributions for one of his children. The Basel-Stadt Court of Appeals rejected his request and ordered him to pay a cost advance. The appellant filed a complaint against this decision with the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court points out that the appeal reasoning must demonstrate according to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG how the contested act violates the law and must engage in detail with the considerations of the contested decision. The Court of Appeals found that the appellant has a monthly surplus and can pay the court costs in installments. Evidence of claimed expenses was not submitted despite a request. The appellant did not present any permissible new evidence or sufficient justifications to the Federal Court, thus the appeal does not meet the requirements of Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG. The appeal is classified as hopeless from the outset, which is why a request for free legal aid for the Federal Court procedure must also be rejected (Art. 64 para. 1 BGG).
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The Federal Court does not enter into the appeal and rejects the request for free legal aid, while the appellant is charged with court costs.
6B_87/2024: Judgment regarding brawl and arbitrariness
Summary of the Facts
On the evening of July 26, 2017, a physical altercation occurred at U.________platz in V.________ between two groups. A.________ was accused of inflicting cuts and stab wounds on B.________ with a folding knife. Furthermore, A.________ was driving an electric scooter while unfit to drive and was in possession of and consuming marijuana illegally. The Lucerne Criminal Court convicted him of brawl and other offenses, recognizing the attempted serious bodily injury due to excusable self-defense as not punishable. The Lucerne Cantonal Court confirmed the conviction for brawl. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The appellant criticizes the arbitrary determination of the facts by the lower court and invokes the principle "in dubio pro reo". The Federal Court examines the burden of justification and the prohibition of arbitrariness according to Art. 9 BV. It finds that the evidence assessment of the lower court is not obviously incorrect. The Federal Court notes that the facts were assessed by the lower court as a unit in terms of substance, location, and time. It does not evaluate the altercation as separate actions and confirms the assessment that the appellant participated in the brawl with eventual intent. Art. 133 para. 2 StGB (exclusion in case of exclusive defense) is not applicable, as the appellant actively participated in the altercation from the outset. Regarding the accusation of attempted serious bodily injury in excusable self-defense, the Federal Court states that this act does not consume the brawl. Both penal norms are in real competition. The appellant's objection regarding the penal point and the cost distribution is not further examined, as the appeal remains unsuccessful regarding the conviction.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The Federal Court rejects the appeal and denies the request for free legal aid. The costs are imposed on the appellant.
7B_1344/2025: Non-payment of the cost advance leads to non-admission of the appeal
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG filed an appeal in criminal matters against the decision of the Cantonal Court of the Canton of Valais, Criminal Chamber, dated December 3, 2025. The procedure concerned an ordered dismissal or non-admission. The appellant was required by the Federal Court to pay a cost advance of CHF 800. After failing to fulfill this obligation despite the set deadline and a legally mandated grace period, the Federal Court did not admit the appeal.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The appellant filed an appeal in criminal matters on December 8, 2025, against the decision of the Cantonal Court of the Canton of Valais.
- **E.2:** According to Art. 62 para. 1 BGG, a cost advance must be paid when the procedure is initiated.
- **E.3:** The cost advance was not paid within the set deadline and a legally required grace period. The corresponding decisions were validly served to the appellant. Non-payment of the advance leads, according to Art. 62 para. 3 BGG in the procedure according to Art. 108 BGG, to the non-admission of the appeal.
- **E.4:** Due to the lack of payment of the advance, the single judge decided on non-admission and imposed court costs on the appellant.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The Federal Court did not enter into the appeal and imposed court costs of CHF 500 on the appellant.
7B_72/2026: Pre-trial detention and substitute measures
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is accused of a qualified violation of the Narcotics Act as he is alleged to have organized the suspected sale of two kilograms of cocaine. He was arrested on December 14, 2024, and has since been in pre-trial detention, which has been extended several times. The appellant requested his release from detention, along with the granting of substitute measures, which was rejected by both the coercive measures court and the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau. The Federal Court has also dealt with previous complaints and the question of special detention grounds, particularly the risk of collusion and flight.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_628/2025: Judgment regarding the obligation to provide benefits in case of occupational pension law invalidity
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a carpenter and technician with various professional qualifications, was insured until the end of 2019 by the Helvetia Collective Foundation for Employee Pension Provision and from January 2020 by the AXA Foundation for Occupational Pensions. After health issues due to depression and schizophrenia, he applied for an invalidity pension in November 2020, which was granted by the Invalidity Insurance from October 2021. AXA provided him with pension benefits under the obligation to advance from October 2022 and subsequently sought recourse against Helvetia. The Social Insurance Court of Basel-Stadt rejected this claim. AXA filed an appeal with the Federal Court against this decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_99/2026: Judgment regarding the denial of legal recourse in a tax dispute
Summary of the Facts
A.________, residing in U.________, filed a complaint against the Cantonal Tax Office of Solothurn on the grounds that his revision request dated September 2, 2025, regarding a security order had not been answered. The Cantonal Tax Court of Solothurn rejected the complaint regarding the legal denial with a judgment dated December 1, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_584/2025: Decision regarding the entitlement to benefits from the invalidity insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, born in 1967, submitted a request for benefits from the invalidity insurance in June 2019. The responsible cantonal invalidity insurance office conducted two medical expert opinions. By decision dated April 10, 2024, the entitlement to professional measures and an invalidity pension was denied. The cantonal insurance court rejected the complaint filed against this decision on September 11, 2025. The appellant requested from the Federal Court primarily the granting of a full invalidity pension, and secondarily a remand for further investigations.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7F_23/2024: Inadmissibility of a complaint
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a revision request against the judgment of the Federal Court (7B_183/2024) dated March 12, 2024, in which his complaint regarding legal denial and unlawful delay by the Criminal Law Chamber of the Bernese Court of Appeals was not admitted. In the request, he also demands the effect of suspensive effect and requests free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_22/2025: Subsequent collection of import duties on peanut oil in the procedure of active processing
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG imported peanut oil into Switzerland from 2015 to 2020 in the procedure of active processing. Following explanations from A.________ AG, production losses were recorded in internal Excel spreadsheets, which were accepted by the customs authorities but were not reported on a timely basis. Upon transition to the final settlement, the customs authority reported discrepancies of 226,992.70 kilograms, for which import duties of CHF 311,544.45 were claimed. A.________ AG argued that the losses had been included in payment balances of the following approval periods but had never been explicitly required by the customs authorities. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed the claim for subsequent payment, after which A.________ AG filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_934/2024: Decision regarding the lifting of seals in connection with a criminal procedure
Summary of the Facts
The criminal procedure concerns the suspicion of money laundering and bribery of foreign officials. The appellant, a former employee and business partner of an affected bank, is accused of having participated through actions or omissions in the concealment and securing of illegal funds. In the course of this procedure, the Federal Prosecutor's Office (BA) requested the lifting of seals on certain electronic data from the appellant's personal mailbox. The coercive measures court of the Canton of Vaud partially lifted the seals.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_133/2024: Decision on the question of the partial classification decision regarding human trafficking
Summary of the Facts
A.________ and B.________, two foreign nationals without residence permits, worked for D.J.________ and C.J.________ in Geneva and temporarily in France under precarious conditions since May 2020. They performed various household tasks, cared for D.J.________'s mother, and looked after the couple's children. In 2021, they reported cases of sexual assaults and abuse to the authorities, claiming to have been victims of human trafficking and exploitation. The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Geneva partially closed the investigation and decided to drop certain allegations, including human trafficking. In a judgment dated December 22, 2023, the Chamber of Appeals of the Canton of Geneva confirmed this partial classification decision. Both complainants filed a complaint against this decision with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_40/2025: Judgment regarding the invalidity pension (degree of invalidity from June 2019)
Summary of the Facts
A.________ applied for invalidity insurance benefits due to "various" health impairments. The IV office of the Canton of Aargau conducted numerous investigations, including a multidisciplinary report from MEDAS Interlaken, and initially granted him a full (for the period from January 2017 to May 2019) and subsequently a half invalidity pension from June 2019. Following a remand by the Federal Court due to procedural defects, the insurance court of the Canton of Aargau modified this decision and awarded A.________ a three-quarters pension from June 2019. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court, requesting that he also be granted an indefinite full invalidity pension beyond June 2019.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1075/2025: Decision regarding the unsealing of documents and data carriers in the context of a criminal investigation
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of Basel-Landschaft is conducting a criminal investigation against A.A.________ for attempted murder, simple bodily injury with a dangerous object, breach of domestic peace, and property damage. He is accused of having attacked his brother on July 13, 2025, with a roll wrench and a metal meat mallet, causing severe head injuries. In the course of the investigation, electronic data carriers (including mobile phone, laptop, hard drive) and various written documents were sealed. The coercive measures court of the Canton of Basel-Landschaft partially approved the request for unsealing, but with time limitations.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_74/2025: Decision regarding the regulation of personal relationships of a non-custodial parent
Summary of the Facts
A.________ and B.________ are unmarried parents of their daughter C.________, born in 2017. The parental relationship ended in February 2021. The differing versions of the parties regarding the previous care situation of C.________ led to prolonged legal disputes over visitation rights and care for C.________. Initially, sole custody was provisionally awarded to the mother, later the visitation arrangements were expanded. The father ultimately requested the Federal Court to introduce a shared parenting model and further extend visitation times, which was denied.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_95/2026: Decision regarding the complaint of a debtor against seizure documents
Summary of the Facts
The appellant was subjected to enforcement by the Berner Jura-Seeland enforcement office, which issued seizure documents on November 5, 2025. The appellant filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Bern on November 22, 2025, which was deemed late. The Cantonal Court did not enter into it. The appellant contested this decision with a complaint to the Federal Court, which also did not enter into the complaint.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_952/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint due to insufficient justification
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a complaint against a decision of non-admission of the Geneva Public Prosecutor dated May 29, 2025, which was rejected by the lower court on September 4, 2025. The reason for this was a late payment of the security required by the lower court. The appellant subsequently filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1102/2025: Non-consideration of complaints in criminal matters
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed complaints against two decisions of the Cantonal Court of Zurich: a ruling dated September 11, 2025, regarding renewed evidence collection and a decision dated November 7, 2025, regarding the non-processing of complaints against dismissal decisions. Both complaints were dealt with by the Federal Court jointly.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_435/2024: Non-admission due to late submission
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court against the decision of the Criminal Appeals Chamber of the Bernese Court of Appeals dated October 23, 2023, which had rejected a complaint against the Public Prosecutor's decision regarding a non-admission order dated September 12, 2023. The appellant contested, among other things, that the proceedings and the decision were not written in French, although he had requested this, and demanded their nullification. He also requested the restoration of the deadline, suspensive effect, and free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_429/2025: Accusation of false statements to commercial register authorities (Art. 153 StGB)
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is accused of having made false statements to the Commercial Register Office of the Canton of Zurich during the founding of C.________ AG on March 25, 2015, by declaring through the signing of the Stampa declaration that he did not plan any asset acquisition, although he took over construction inventory and tools from B.________ for CHF 55,000. The District Court of Wil found him guilty and imposed a conditional fine. The Cantonal Court of St. Gallen confirmed this conviction and noted a violation of the acceleration requirement. With a complaint in criminal matters, A.________ requested to be acquitted or for the case to be remanded for re-evaluation, in the alternative a discharge from punishment according to Art. 52 StGB.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_307/2025: Judgment in a criminal case concerning drug offenses
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is accused of having transported 992 grams of methamphetamine into Switzerland with his vehicle coming from Germany on July 1, 2020. The drugs were found in a cavity behind the spare wheel well of the vehicle.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.