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 Lexplorer portal. There, you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your legal areas.
9C_140/2025: Discretionary Assessment by the Tax Administration of the Canton of Thurgau
Summary of the Facts
The dispute concerns whether the discretionary assessment by the tax administration of the Canton of Thurgau regarding the tax period 2020 for A.________ AG was lawful. A.________ AG did not submit a tax return despite multiple reminders and extensions, leading the tax administration to carry out a discretionary assessment. The complainant appealed against the subsequent decision not to consider the objection by the tax administration, raising cantonal and ultimately federal legal remedies, all of which were unsuccessful.
Summary of the Considerations
- **(E.1)** The objection by A.________ AG against the discretionary assessment was not processed by the tax administration as it was not justified in time and did not include evidence. The cantonal authorities confirmed this handling. - **(E.2)** The complaint in public law matters is permissible (Art. 82 lit. a, Art. 86 para. 1 lit. d, and Art. 90 BGG). The complainant is legitimized, the legal remedy was submitted in time, and the Federal Court enters into the complaint. - **(E.3)** According to applicable provisions (Art. 164 para. 2 StG/TG, Art. 48 para. 2 StHG, Art. 132 para. 3 DBG), an objection against discretionary assessments must be justified and requires evidence. The objection instance only checks the formal requirements of the discretionary assessment and not its substantive correctness. The complainant did not meet the requirements, and therefore the decision not to consider is to be confirmed. - **(E.4)** The complainant raised various constitutional grievances (e.g., Art. 5 para. 3, Art. 9 BV; Art. 29 para. 2 BV), which were deemed unfounded or inadequately substantiated. The procedure of the tax administration was based on multiple extensions, and a further extension would not have been appropriate given the continued breach of duty by the complainant. - **(E.5)** The complaint is obviously unfounded and to be dismissed in the simplified procedure.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Court dismisses the complaint and imposes court costs of 5,000 Swiss francs on the complainant. No party compensation is awarded.
7B_160/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a request to postpone the main hearing from March 2 to 6, 2026, before the District Court of Sitten. His lawyer Me Yaël Hayat stated that she also had to attend a procedure in Geneva on those days. The request was rejected by the president of the District Court. Subsequently, the complainant turned to the Federal Court to challenge the original decision. He cited, among other things, the principle of equality of arms and the right to his lawyer.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines the admissibility of the complaint ex officio. It is determined that the contested decision is to be regarded as an interim decision under Art. 93 BGG. An appeal can only be filed against this if an irreparable disadvantage is threatened. It is discussed that according to Art. 331 para. 5 StPO, a decision on a request for postponement is final and does not allow for further legal remedies. The Federal Court correctly treated the competent lower instance (president of the District Court) as the only cantonal instance due to the lack of cantonal appeal possibilities. An irreparable disadvantage is only presumed if no subsequent correction by other legal remedies is possible. The complainant should have detailed why his lawyer could not represent him due to scheduling conflicts. He failed to provide sufficient justification. The considerations mentioned regarding the lawyer's removal and the transfer of the case to other affected mandates or lawyer colleagues were not deemed adequately substantiated. The later introduction of further arguments regarding a parallel proceeding concerns a different file and therefore fell outside the central disputed circle - since the same StPO-cited binding materials do not enable a valid parallel claiming basis.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint was declared inadmissible, the request for free legal assistance was denied, and court costs were set at 1,200 CHF.
2C_51/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
A Kosovo citizen (A.A.) and his two children (B.A. and C.A.), also Kosovo citizens, relied on the extension of their residence permits and applied for such after the previous permits had expired. The cantonal authorities rejected their requests, and the cantonal courts confirmed this decision. The complainant unsuccessfully attempted to submit a new request citing a case of severe personal hardship under Art. 30 para. 1 lit. b AIG.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1**: Factual introduction on the origin and residence conditions of the complainants. Finding of crimes and a too short stay (under 10 years) in Switzerland to substantiate a claim. - **E.3.1**: The Federal Court examines the admissibility of the legal process and concludes that the complainant has no right to access the ordinary public law appeal, as there is no legal entitlement to the residence permit. - **E.3.2**: The claims under Art. 8 ECHR (private and family life) do not exist either due to the short stay or the lack of extraordinary integration or family separation. - **E.3.3**: Art. 30 para. 1 lit. b AIG and Art. 31 VZAE do not establish a legal claim but create discretionary scopes that were not violated here. - **E.3.4**: Art. 3 CRC (best interests of the child) is not directly applicable and does not guarantee a right to residence. - **E.4**: The subsidiary constitutional complaint fails because the complainant could not assert a sufficient legal claim. His allegations of procedural errors could not be examined independently of the main subject matter.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint is declared inadmissible, the court costs are imposed on the complainant, and no party compensation is awarded.
7B_1254/2025: International Arrest Warrant for a Suspect
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is accused of making false accusations against a Zurich public prosecutor. He was issued an arrest warrant by the Public Prosecutor's Office II of the Canton of Zurich in the Schengen area (except in his home country Germany) as his whereabouts were unknown and there was a flight risk. After his request for the deletion of the warrant was rejected by the Cantonal Court of Zurich, A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_151/2026: Dismissal of the Complaint Against Preventive Detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced by the Regional Court of Jura bernois-Seeland on December 2, 2025, among other things, to a prison sentence of 59 months and a fine of 25 daily rates for sexual coercion and rape. A deportation order was also issued for seven years. At the same time, his preventive detention was ordered for a duration of three months, which was confirmed by the complaint chamber of the Cantonal Court of Bern on January 5, 2026. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Court seeking his immediate release, possibly under the imposition of alternative measures.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_381/2025: Inadmissibility Regarding Agricultural Land Law
Summary of the Facts
A.________, holder of a CFC as a commercial employee and operator of an agricultural business in Vaud, purchased an agricultural plot for CHF 396,000 in June 2024. This includes a residential property and agricultural land. The management of the plot is currently carried out by a tenant. His applications for a purchase permit were rejected by the cantonal land commission and later by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Vaud on the grounds that he lacked the necessary qualifications as a self-farmer.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_104/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against the Decision Not to Consider
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint on February 2, 2026 (postmark) against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Thurgau, which did not consider the appeal due to the non-submission of the appeal declaration.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_813/2025: Non-consideration of a Complaint Regarding an Objection Against a Penal Order
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was convicted by penalty order dated May 13, 2025, for forgery and sentenced to a conditional fine. Since the penalty order was not picked up within the time limit, it was considered delivered according to Art. 85 para. 4 lit. a StPO on May 22, 2025. On July 16, 2025, the complainant filed an objection, which was declared late. The Cantonal Court of Solothurn subsequently dismissed the complaint. The complainant then appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_238/2025: Non-consideration of a Complaint Against the Definitive Legal Opening
Summary of the Facts
The Regional Court Oberland granted the defendants on September 22, 2025, the definitive legal opening for several amounts related to cantonal and municipal taxes in 2021 as well as fines and fees. The complainant filed a complaint against this decision before the Cantonal Court of Bern, which did not consider it. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court on December 1, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_90/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (A.________ GmbH) appealed against a decision of the Civil Court of Basel-Stadt. As it did not make a cost advance, the Appellate Court of Basel-Stadt did not consider the appeal (decision of December 9, 2025). An initial complaint to the Federal Court was dismissed on February 16, 2026, due to insufficient justification. On February 17, 2026, the complainant submitted another complaint against the same decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_101/2026: Non-consideration of Complaints Regarding Cantonal and Municipal Taxes as well as Direct Federal Tax of the Canton of Bern
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ and B.A.________ filed legal remedies against decisions of the Tax Appeals Commission of the Canton of Bern regarding the tax period 2024 (cantonal and municipal taxes as well as direct federal tax), which were dismissed due to formal defects. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern also did not consider this. With their complaint to the Federal Court, the complainants requested the approval of the complaint and the dismissal of the judgment of January 7, 2026.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_141/2025: Inadmissibility of an Objection Against a Discretionary Assessment in Tax Law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________ AG, relocated its headquarters to the Canton of Thurgau in 2020, where it owns several properties. Due to the failure to submit a tax return for the tax period 2020, the tax administration of the Canton of Thurgau determined the taxable net profit and the taxable capital within the framework of a discretionary assessment. The complainant filed an objection against this assessment, which was declared inadmissible by the tax administration due to insufficient justification and the lack of evidence. The cantonal legal remedies of the complainant were unsuccessful. It requested before the Federal Court the annulment of the decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Thurgau and the remittance of the case.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_475/2025: Restoration of the Lawful State in Connection with a Horse Boarding in the Agricultural Zone
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, tenant of a plot in Münsingen, operated a horse boarding facility with unauthorized buildings and facilities there. The municipality of Münsingen ordered the dismantling of the unauthorized construction projects. After complaints were rejected at the cantonal level, the deadline for restoring the lawful state was finally set for December 15, 2025. With a complaint to the Federal Court, the complainant requested in particular the annulment of the judgment of the lower instance and a reassessment.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_149/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Regarding Precautionary Measures
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a civil complaint before the Federal Court against a ruling by the president of the Appellate Court of Basel-Stadt dated January 20, 2026. With the contested ruling, the respondent was ordered to pay precautionary child support contributions. The complainant further claimed that with the ruling her appeal (against a decision of the Civil Court of Basel-Stadt dated September 3, 2025) was rejected.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1358/2025: Decision on a Complaint Regarding the Rejection of a Recusal Request Against a Prosecutor
Summary of the Facts
Against the complainant, who is accused of having committed sexual assaults against his two children between 2006 and 2018, the District Attorney's Office of Lausanne initiated a criminal investigation. In this context, the complainant filed a recusal request against the responsible prosecutor, which was rejected by the lower instance, the Criminal Appeal Chamber of the Vaud Cantonal Court. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_63/2026: Judgment Regarding Withdrawal Fiction and Deadline Restoration
Summary of the Facts
The Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft discontinued the appeal procedure due to the withdrawal of the appeal by the complainant based on Art. 407 para. 1 lit. c StPO. The complainant contested the withdrawal fiction and filed a late complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court. At the same time, the complainant requested the restoration of the deadline, claiming that due to his personal situation he was unable to meet the deadline.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_403/2025: Judgment on the Claim Due to Breach of Contractual Ancillary Obligations
Summary of the Facts
The E.________ AG, the respondent, had concluded lease agreements for business premises for a medical center with A.________ AG, B.________ AG, and C.________ AG (formerly D.________ AG), the complainants. The complainants contested these contracts and terminated them without notice due to alleged deception or a fundamental error. The respondent claimed a breach of contractual ancillary obligations and successfully sued for damages before the Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich. The complainants filed a civil complaint and requested the dismissal of the lawsuit.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_360/2025: Judgment on the Degree of Substantiation in Civil Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The B.________ AG (respondent) had acquired a property from the A.________ AG (complainant) with turnkey multi-family houses to be constructed. The A.________ AG provided a rent guarantee, which was asserted in court by the B.________ AG after a deviation between agreed and actual rental income was found. The dispute was about the amount and calculation of rental income and the question of legally sufficient substantiation of the facts in civil proceedings.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_244/2025: Judgment Regarding Definitive Legal Opening
Summary of the Facts
The Cantonal Court of Zug granted the Canton of Zug (respondent) definitive legal opening on October 29, 2025, for CHF 17,716.85 plus 4% interest on CHF 17,000.-- since March 6, 2025. The losing A.________ GmbH (complainant) in the legal opening procedure filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Zug. This court, by decision of November 20, 2025, did not consider the complaint. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court on December 12, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_834/2025: Non-consideration of a Complaint Regarding Home Invasion and Deportation
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was convicted by the Cantonal Court of Aargau for home invasion and multiple thefts and sentenced to an unconditional fine and deportation for a duration of five years. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court, among other things, due to alleged violations of legal hearing and arbitrariness.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_248/2025: Non-consideration Decision in a Legal Opening Procedure
Summary of the Facts
The District Court of Meilen granted the complainant definitive legal opening for a claim of CHF 50.-- plus interest on November 12, 2025. The complainant appealed against this decision to the Cantonal Court of Zurich, which, due to the lack of justification for his submission, did not consider it by decision of December 3, 2025. The complainant ultimately filed a complaint with the Federal Court on December 23, 2025.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_74/2026: Rejection of a Residence Permit Due to Late Filing of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant from Tunisia wanted to file a complaint against the refusal of a residence permit. The cantonal office for population and migration of the Canton of Geneva had denied the permit on May 27, 2025. A complaint filed with the first instance was not processed due to lateness. The second cantonal instance also rejected the complaint, stating that the late submission could be attributed to the complainant or his representative and did not constitute a formal legal error.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_140/2026: Alternative Measures Instead of Preventive Detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is accused of professional theft, multiple home invasions, and property damage. He is alleged to have committed several burglaries in Bern and stored stolen property in a foreign cellar. The coercive measures court placed him in preventive detention, which the Cantonal Court of Bern replaced with alternative measures: reporting obligation and surrender of the passport. A.________ requested his release from custody without alternative measures before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_236/2025: Non-consideration in a Complaint Against the Definitive Legal Opening
Summary of the Facts
The Regional Court Oberland granted the Canton of Bern (respondent) definitive legal opening for CHF 10,415.90. The Cantonal Court of Bern did not consider the complainant's complaint against this decision. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6F_37/2025: Non-consideration of a Revision Request Due to Incomplete Payment of Cost Advance
Summary of the Facts
The applicant requested the revision of a Federal Court judgment (6B_175/2025). In parallel, he filed a recusal request against the presiding member, Federal Judge von Felten, based on previous decisions against him. It was found that the applicant did not fully pay the required cost advance, even after being granted an extension.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_622/2024: Inadmissibility of a Complaint in a Building Permit Matter
Summary of the Facts
The complaint concerns two construction projects of D.________ AG in Zurich, for which building permits were granted under conditions in 2022. Following objections from third parties, the building decisions were partially adjusted by the Building Appeals Court and the Administrative Court. The complainants ultimately demanded before the Federal Court the full annulment of the building permits or their remittance to the lower instance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_91/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against the Deportation Decision
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court had to decide on a complaint of a Colombian citizen who filed a complaint against his deportation decision from the Service de la population of the Canton of Vaud dated November 27, 2025. The court first clarified procedural questions, as the lower instance, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Vaud, had declared his appeal inadmissible due to late submission.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_626/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Due to Insufficient Justification
Summary of the Facts
The municipality of B.________ received definitive legal opening from the Regional Court Oberland for the claim of CHF 63,219.55. The complainant filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Bern against this, which did not consider it. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_483/2025: Serious Violation of Traffic Rules
Summary of the Facts
A.________ exceeded the speed limit on a road with a maximum speed of 60 km/h by driving at 96 km/h on April 8, 2021. The District Court of Münchwilen convicted him for serious violation of traffic rules with a conditional fine and a fine. The Cantonal Court of Thurgau confirmed the judgment. A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters, requesting acquittal from the serious traffic rule violation or punishment for an offense or remittance of the case to the lower instance.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_136/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint and Dismissal of the Request for Free Legal Aid
Summary of the Facts
The complainant requested free legal aid in connection with a proceeding against a law firm, among other things, for a declaration of a violation of personality rights, the release of personal data, and compensation for damages as well as satisfaction. In this proceeding, the request for free legal aid was denied by the Cantonal Court of Zug. Subsequently, the Cantonal Court dismissed the complaint filed against this. Before the Federal Court, the complainant requested the annulment of the appellate court's decision and the granting of free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_967/2025: Non-consideration Decision Due to Missed Objection Deadline According to Penal Order
Summary of the Facts
The public prosecutor's office Lenzburg-Aarau issued a penal order against the complainant on July 24, 2025. The complainant filed an objection on September 10, 2025, and requested on September 15, 2025, the restoration of the objection deadline. The District Court of Aarau did not consider the objection due to lateness. The Cantonal Court of Aargau dismissed the complaint against this decision. The complainant requested with the present complaint the annulment of the appellate court's decision and the remittance for a substantive examination of his request for deadline restoration.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_19/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.A.________ filed a complaint against a decision of the Civil Chamber of the Geneva Cantonal Court on October 27, 2025. The subject of the proceedings was the dismissal of a cantonal request for revision according to Art. 328 ff. ZPO. The complainant simultaneously requested the granting of free legal aid or an extension of the deadline for the payment of the requested process cost advances. His requests were rejected by the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_803/2025: Dismissal of the Complaint Regarding Representation Authority in the Condominium Association
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________ Sàrl, is the owner of several units within a condominium association (PPE B.________) and appointed her father E.________ as a representative at a meeting of the condominium owners on August 19, 2021. However, the meeting refused E.________ the authority to represent. A.________ Sàrl then requested the nullification or annulment of this decision. Her lawsuit was unsuccessful in the cantonal instances.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_242/2025: Inadmissibility of a Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The Cantonal Court of Zug granted definitive legal opening to the Canton of Zug as the respondent on October 29, 2025, for a claim against the complainant in the amount of CHF 20,895.40 and 4% interest on CHF 10,187.15 since March 6, 2025. The complainant filed a complaint against this decision to the Cantonal Court of Zug, which, by decision of November 20, 2025, did not consider the complaint. The complainant then turned to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_474/2025: Non-consideration of an Appeal Regarding Compensation for Official Defense
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, official defender of B.________, appealed the decision dispositive of the District Court of Frauenfeld from March 28, 2024, including the awarded compensation of CHF 25,000.-- multiple times. Initially, he filed an appeal in the name of his client, later he did so again in his own name. The Cantonal Court of Thurgau did not consider his own appeal, after which the complainant filed a complaint in criminal matters.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
6B_475/2024: Multiple Bribery of Swiss Officials
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was accused of having granted undue advantages to a Swiss official (D.________) or third parties designated by him between 2004 and 2013 to secure contracts from SECO for certain companies. The granted advantages included monetary amounts, gifts, and invitations. These proceedings went through several instances; the Federal Criminal Court had convicted A.________ again for multiple bribery in appeal, against which he filed a complaint.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_240/2025: Non-consideration of a Complaint Due to Non-payment of the Cost Advance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern, which did not consider a legal opening matter.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_169/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against Precautionary Measures for Personality Protection
Summary of the Facts
This case concerns a complaint from A.A.________ and B.A.________ against precautionary measures regarding personality protection (Art. 28b ZGB), which were rejected by the lower instance, the unique judge of the Cour civile II of the Cantonal Tribunal of Valais. Specifically, contact and approach bans were imposed on the complainants under sanction of Art. 292 StGB.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_740/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint in Unemployment Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant sought unemployment compensation, which was denied by the Unia unemployment insurance fund. The central question was whether the required proof of actual wage flow for the contribution period was provided. The complainant submitted wage statements, which, from the perspective of the lower instances, did not substantiate the proof of wage flow. Despite requests from the unemployment insurance fund, the complainant refused to submit additional evidence.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_7/2026: Non-consideration of a Complaint in a Legal Opening Procedure
Summary of the Facts
In this case, the District Court of Bülach granted the Political Municipality B.________ definitive legal opening for a claim of CHF 10,682.10 plus interest. The complainant requested the Cantonal Court of Zurich to restore the complaint deadline against the legal opening judgment, which was denied. Subsequently, the Cantonal Court did not consider the complaint. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_589/2025: Dismissal of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, was a participant in a master's program at the University of Geneva. After she repeatedly failed examinations in part of the program (DAS), her continuation of the study program was prohibited. This ban was ultimately lifted in the context of a cantonal procedure, with the university granting a third exam retake. The cantonal courts then declared the subject of the complaint as resolved. The complainant complained before the Federal Court, among other things, about the violation of her right to access the court and demanded clarification of the legality of the original decision and compensation.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_134/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint for Free Legal Aid
Summary of the Facts
The complainant requested free legal aid for a proceeding before the Cantonal Court of Zug, in which he asserted labor law and personality law claims. The Cantonal Court dismissed the request as the claims were considered hopeless. The Cantonal Court of Zug also dismissed the complaint filed against this. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court and again requested free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_741/2025: Procedural Requirement for the Claim to Unemployment Compensation
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, a former partner and managing director of a now bankrupt GmbH, filed a complaint against the decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz, which had denied her claim for unemployment compensation. The core issue was the proof of actual wage flow, which is a necessary condition for fulfilling the contribution period. Despite submitted wage statements, the complainant could not sufficiently prove the actual wage flow.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_246/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant opposed a decision of the Civil Court of Basel-Stadt, which had granted the respondent (Canton of Basel-Stadt) definitive legal opening for a claim in the amount of CHF 750.– plus collection costs. The Appellate Court of Basel-Stadt did not consider the complainant's appeal. Before the Federal Court, the complainant made various submissions and submitted several supplements.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.