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 dispositive parts. 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 fields.
7B_1416/2025: Non-admittance and non-acceptance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a complaint in criminal matters against the order of the single judge of the Appenzell Outer Rhodes Cantonal Court dated December 1, 2025. The subject of the dispute was a non-admittance.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The appellant filed the complaint on December 23, 2025. - **E.2:** The Federal Court instructed the appellant to pay a cost advance of CHF 800 within a set deadline, according to Art. 62 para. 1 BGG. - **E.3:** After the first deadline expired unused, a new deadline until February 3, 2026, was set with the note that if payment was not made, the complaint would not be considered (Art. 62 para. 3 BGG). Legally delivered orders are considered known unless access can be conclusively excluded. - **E.4:** The cost advance was not paid within the new deadline. Therefore, the Federal Court declared the complaint inadmissible in the proceedings according to Art. 108 BGG. - **E.5:** The court costs are to be imposed on the appellant according to Art. 66 para. 1 BGG.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The Federal Court did not consider the complaint and imposed the court costs on the appellant.
2C_89/2026: Decision regarding animal keeping ban
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ was imposed a permanently unlimited animal keeping ban regarding pigs and chickens by the veterinary service of the Canton of Lucerne, with the additional obligation to involve a caregiver for the keeping of his dog. The Cantonal Court of Lucerne did not consider a complaint filed against it, as the legal submission did not meet the statutory requirements.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1**: The Federal Court examines the admissibility of the complaint according to Art. 86 para. 1 lit. d and Art. 90 as well as Art. 83 BGG. It is determined that the complaint is fundamentally admissible. **E.2**: According to Art. 42 BGG, legal submissions to the Federal Court must contain a substantive justification that specifically addresses the considerations of the lower court. This applies particularly in the case of a non-acceptance decision. However, the appellant did not demonstrate that the lower court violated federal law or constitutional rights. His submission lacks both a legally sufficient justification and a statement regarding the lower court's considerations. **E.3**: The complaint is obviously insufficiently justified and therefore cannot be dealt with in the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The complaint is not considered, and the court costs are imposed on the appellant, without granting compensation for a party.
9C_163/2025: Decision regarding the claim for disability pension and its calculation
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a former self-employed private investigator, applied for a disability pension from the Cantonal Office for Disability Insurance in Geneva due to completely disabling health complaints (since April 2020). The office granted him a half disability pension from June 2021, based on a certain income and a disability level of 59%. A.________ contested this decision before the lower court, which dismissed his complaint. He then filed a complaint with the Federal Court, demanding the annulment of the lower court's decision and a higher pension.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The Federal Court examined the substantive content of the complaint based on the legal situation. Although A.________ only requested the annulment of the decision, the statements were understood as a demand for a higher disability pension. - **E.2:** Tax documents newly submitted by the appellant were deemed inadmissible due to the timing of their preparation and lack of reasons for their late submission. - **E.3:** The Federal Court found that the lower court's findings on the facts are binding, unless they are obviously incorrect or legally infringed. - **E.4:** It concerned the amount and calculation of the disability pension. - **E.5:** Legislative changes regarding the further development of disability insurance had no impact on the case. - **E.6:** The lower court correctly used statistical data (ESS) since the last actually earned income of the appellant could not be determined with certainty. The appellant was no longer professionally active before the onset of the disability. A calculation using statistical values is therefore lawful. - **E.7:** The demand for higher pension claims by considering older incomes and reconstructing them from tax data was rejected by the Federal Court with reference to the legal requirements for corrections to individual AHV accounts. - **E.8:** Due to a lack of legal argumentation against the lower court's statements, the complaint was completely dismissed.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The complaint was dismissed and the court costs were imposed on the appellant.
7B_915/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against the non-admittance of a criminal complaint
Summary of the Facts
A.________, the appellant, filed a criminal complaint for actions that allegedly took place during her hospitalization from December 30, 2013, to January 6, 2014, in a clinic. She claimed that she was forcibly taken to the hospital by her son and that the clinic staff and the police acted unlawfully. On May 19, 2025, more than a decade after the incidents, the appellant filed the complaint. The cantonal public prosecutor's office decided on June 11, 2025, not to initiate a criminal investigation, as the relevant criminal offenses were time-barred or the elements of the offense were not fulfilled. The cantonal appeal instance rejected the subsequent appeal on August 14, 2025.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_314/2025: Partial approval of helplessness compensation
Summary of the Facts
The appellant (IV Office of the Canton of Geneva) refused compensation for helplessness to the insured (A.________), who suffers from a proximal paralysis of the left arm and other health restrictions, as he only needed assistance with eating. Upon appeal, the lower court granted the insured helplessness compensation of a mild degree from May 1, 2023, based on an assessment that assistance with dressing and undressing, particularly regarding the handling of compression stockings, was necessary. The IV Office appealed to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4F_64/2025: Judgment regarding non-admittance of a request for revision
Summary of the Facts
A.________, the applicant, requested a revision of the judgment of the Federal Court dated December 4, 2025 (4D_220/2025), in which the complaint against a decision on legal enforcement was not admitted. The applicant justified her request for revision with the allegedly incorrect assessment of numerous pieces of evidence and incorrect application of law by the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_281/2025: Termination of the lease contract
Summary of the Facts
The appellant (tenant) entered into a lease agreement with the respondent (landlord) in 2007 for a rental apartment. The rent was adjusted several times. In 2021, the landlord terminated the lease due to alleged privileges and inappropriate behavior of the tenant, which were attributed to his relationship with a former chairman of the board of directors of the landlord. The tenant contested the termination and the issued prolongation.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_670/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint in connection with a work contract and a request for free legal assistance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint against a decision of the President of the I. Appeals Chamber of the Civil Court of the Canton of Fribourg dated November 28, 2025. The complaint concerned a work contract and a request for free legal assistance. However, the appellant failed to pay the required advance payment within the deadline, although this was initially extended by judicial order until January 20, 2026, and later until February 10, 2026.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_386/2025: Judgment on short-time work compensation in connection with work stoppage and working time controls
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court examined the complaint of A.________ GmbH against the judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zug. The focus is on the recovery of CHF 225,316.25 in short-time work compensation, which the unemployment insurance fund of Zug claimed due to inadequate evidence of work stoppage for the period from April 2020 to August 2021. The Administrative Court had already confirmed the recovery.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_716/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against the rejection of the request for restoration of the deadline and the non-granting of a residence permit
Summary of the Facts
The complaint procedure concerns an Indian couple who have been living in Switzerland without a residence permit for 18 years. The Office for Population and Migration of the Canton of Geneva denied them a residence permit on the grounds of an alleged hardship case and ordered their expulsion from Switzerland. In addition, the couple requested the restoration of the deadline for filing a complaint against the judgment of the cantonal administrative court. The cantonal court instance rejected this complaint as inadmissible due to the missed deadline.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1410/2025: Non-consideration of a complaint against a non-admittance order
Summary of the Facts
The appellant challenged the non-admittance order of the Graubünden public prosecutor's office dated April 8, 2025, which did not open a criminal case against a regional court judge in Albula. The Higher Court of the Canton of Graubünden did not consider the appellant's complaint in its ruling on November 21, 2025. He then filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_91/2026: Non-consideration of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
Swisscom (Schweiz) AG applied for a building permit for a mobile phone facility in Basel in 2020. Following an objection, the construction and hospitality inspection decided in favor of the project under certain conditions in 2024. The building appeal commission reversed this decision in 2025 and referred the matter back for review. The Appeals Court of Basel-Stadt rejected the appeal against the decision of the building appeal commission, after which the objector filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1345/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against the cost regulation of a non-admittance order
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters on December 9, 2025, against a decision of the Chambre des recours pénale des Tribunal cantonal du canton de Vaud, which declared a previous complaint by A.________ against a non-admittance order of the Ministère public des arrondissements de l’Est vaudois dated May 23, 2025, inadmissible. A.________ also requested free legal assistance.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
9C_644/2024: Dismissal of the complaint against the decision of the cantonal office for disability insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, born in 1964, submitted a new application for disability insurance benefits on February 25, 2019, after previous applications had been unsuccessful. The cantonal office for disability insurance rejected the application on July 13, 2023, on the grounds that the degree of disability was only 15%, which was insufficient for pension eligibility. An appeal against this was dismissed by the lower court (the corresponding cantonal instance) on October 14, 2024.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4F_65/2025: Judgment regarding the request for revision in a procedure concerning legal enforcement
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ originally challenged a decision on legal enforcement of the Civil Court of the Canton of Basel-Stadt. The Appeals Court of the Canton of Basel-Stadt dismissed her complaint on October 21, 2025. Her subsequent complaint against this decision was rejected by the Federal Court in the simplified procedure on December 15, 2025, as obviously insufficiently justified. In a submission dated December 25, 2025, as well as further supplements, the applicant requested the revision of this judgment.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4D_1/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The proceedings concern an employment law dispute between the appellant, A.________ SA, and the respondent, B.________. The complaint is directed against a judgment of the civil law appeal chamber of the cantonal court of Vaud dated December 5, 2025.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_14/2026: Judgment on a complaint against the rejection of a request for free legal assistance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters against an order of the President of the Prosecution Chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen. The lower court had rejected the appellant's request for free legal assistance in the cantonal proceedings, as it was of the opinion that there was no need. In the present proceedings, the appellant also addressed criminally relevant data protection allegations against the lower court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_624/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint against a sealing decision
Summary of the Facts
The public prosecutor's office of the Canton of Bern conducted a criminal investigation against A.________, during which his mobile phone was seized. After later sealing and a request for unsealing, the Cantonal Coercive Measures Court partially authorized the search of the mobile phone. The appellant approached the Federal Court with a request to annul this decision and for the immediate return of the mobile phone.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_234/2025: Approval of the complaint regarding the calculation of the total penalty
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was convicted on November 3, 2020, by the Criminal Court of the Canton of Geneva for various offenses to a prison sentence. The execution of the sentence was postponed in favor of inpatient addiction treatment according to Art. 60 StGB. After the measure failed, the competent Geneva District Court (TAPEM) ordered on March 6, 2024, the lifting of the measure and the execution of the remaining sentence. The matter came before the Federal Court after several legal remedies, which had to decide on the calculation of the total penalty and its legal basis.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1419/2025: Non-admittance
Summary of the Facts
The appellants challenged the non-admittance order of the Graubünden public prosecutor's office dated September 4, 2025. The Higher Court of Graubünden, Second Criminal Chamber, did not consider their complaint on December 1, 2025. The appellants filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court against the order of the Higher Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_238/2025: Decision regarding international mutual assistance in tax matters
Summary of the Facts
C.C.________, a tax resident in India, challenged the transmission of bank information to the Indian tax authorities in the context of a mutual assistance request based on the double taxation agreement between Switzerland and India. The Indian authority requested information on the beneficial owner of a bank account which was allegedly controlled by the appellant. The Federal Tax Administration (ESTV) granted mutual assistance in its final decision, making certain redactions. The appellant requested additional redactions and disputed the relevance of the information. The Federal Administrative Court partially upheld the complaint and ordered additional redactions and comments on the identity of the beneficial owner. The appellant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against this judgment.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1321/2025: Non-consideration of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The appellant challenged a judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau, which had partially upheld his complaint and defined instructions for total abstinence and control options for probation assistance. With his complaint in criminal matters, he contested this judgment before the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_249/2025: Inadmissibility of participation in the international mutual assistance procedure
Summary of the Facts
The proceedings concern a request from the Indian tax authorities for mutual assistance under the double taxation agreement between Switzerland and India. Two third parties (A.A.________ and B.A.________) requested to be included in the proceedings after learning that their names would appear in the documents to be transmitted to the Indian authorities. They lodged an objection with the Federal Administrative Court, which treated their request as an inadmissible appeal against the original decision of the Federal Tax Administration and declared it inadmissible.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
9C_358/2025: Assessment of disability insurance after an accident
Summary of the Facts
The appellant applied for disability insurance benefits after an accident in September 2018, including a disability pension and vocational measures. Based on medical reports, the IV Office of the Canton of Vaud rejected the application. A subsequent cantonal legal remedy decision confirmed the rejection. Before the Federal Court, the insured demanded a new assessment, including a new medical evaluation.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
9C_102/2026: Judgment regarding the household fee according to Art. 69 ff. RTVG
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ challenged an order from Serafe AG regarding the household fee. In the lower court proceedings, the Federal Administrative Court set a deadline for the payment of a cost advance under the threat of non-admittance. Before the Federal Court, A.________ requested not to hold her jointly liable for the household fee and also submitted a request for free legal assistance.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_830/2025: Judgment on the non-admittance of an extraordinary death case
Summary of the Facts
B.A.________ was found motionless; the mother A.A.________ reported a suspected crime. The public prosecutor's office of the Canton of Zug ordered non-admittance. The appellant filed a complaint, which was dismissed by the Higher Court of the Canton of Zug due to insufficient justification. A.A.________ escalated the case to the Federal Court, demanding the annulment of the order and the return for full clarification.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_78/2026: Driver's license revocation due to a medium severity traffic violation
Summary of the Facts
- On June 19, 2023, A.________ crossed a bus lane with his delivery van, resulting in a collision with a city bus, causing property damage and minor injury to a passenger. - After a procedure, the Road Traffic Office ordered a four-month revocation of the driver's license. The lower courts, the Department of the Interior and Security, as well as the Higher Court of the Canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes, confirmed this measure.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_618/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
Omnia Immobilier SA, a company founded in 2015 with its registered office in Lausanne, operates in the field of real estate as well as in the marketing of real estate projects under the brand "OMNIA," for which a corresponding trademark was registered in 2020. Its activities include, among other things, the purchase, sale, management, and brokerage of real estate. HOMNIA SA, established in 2017 with its registered office in Geneva, offers services in the field of construction and real estate under the name "HOMNIA" without having registered a trademark. Conflicts arose due to the name and activity similarity of both companies. Omnia Immobilier SA claimed trademark protection and claims under the law of unfair competition, while HOMNIA SA disputed the allegations.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_1051/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint regarding the challenge of an evidence order
Summary of the Facts
In a procedure to contest the recognition of paternity between the parties B.________ (mother), C.________ (child), and A.________ (father), the competent civil court ordered the taking of evidence, including the rejection of an additional medical examination, as two expert pieces of evidence were already available. The complaint from A.________ against this order was declared inadmissible by the Chambre des recours civile des Kantonsgerichts Waadt due to lack of sufficient justification and absence of a serious disadvantage.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1418/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The authority for criminal matters of the Cantonal Court of Neuchâtel dismissed a complaint from A.________ against a seizure order of the public prosecutor's office of Neuchâtel dated November 3, 2025, on November 24, 2025. A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court on December 24, 2025.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_52/2026: Decision regarding the return of weapons and legal delay/legal denial
Summary of the Facts
The Cantonal Police of Zurich seized a weapon on April 19, 2025. With a legally binding order from the Statthalteramt Dielsdorf dated July 7, 2025, the return of the weapon was ordered under conditions. The appellant claimed that the Cantonal Police of Zurich and later also the Cantonal Police of Basel-Stadt delayed the enforcement of the order. With a complaint dated January 20, 2026, he requested the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich to ascertain a legal delay/legal denial and to instruct the return of the weapon. The Administrative Court did not consider the complaint due to lack of jurisdiction. The appellant then filed a complaint in public law matters with the Federal Court and requested the annulment of the non-consideration order as well as the ascertainment of an inadmissible legal delay/denial.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_157/2025: Termination of benefits from an accident insurance following a work accident
Summary of the Facts
The complaint concerns the termination of benefits from an accident insurance (Solida Assurances SA) for an insured person after a work accident. The insured sustained injuries from a falling metal chair on the neck and back area on October 20, 2022. The causal connection between the accident and the health complaints (including herniated disc C4-C5) beyond January 25, 2023, which the insured continues to assert, is in dispute. The lower court (Tribunal cantonal de Vaud) obliged the accident insurer to cover the treatment costs beyond the specified date.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_39/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint against the objection decision of Suva
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a complaint against the objection decision of Suva. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Solothurn did not consider it due to the expiry of the complaint deadline. It also denied the existence of excusable reasons for restoring the deadline.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_1049/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, acknowledged the parental relationship with C.________, born on December 14, 2023. According to a measure of the peace judge of the district of Riviera - Pays-d’Enhaut dated June 4, 2025, a visitation right of the appellant was not provisionally established until a family law procedure regarding the challenge of the recognition of the parental relationship is concluded. The cantonal complaint against this measure was dismissed by the Chambre des curatelles des Tribunal cantonal des Kantons Vaud on November 13, 2025, notably on the grounds that there is no close relationship between the appellant and the child.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_10/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a complaint against the non-admittance order of the public prosecutor's office of See/Oberland dated March 21, 2024. This complaint was dismissed by the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich on November 28, 2025, to the extent it was considered. The appellant then filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court on January 3, 2026.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.