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 in the portal of Lexplorer. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your areas of law.
7B_6/2026: Non-admission of the complaint in criminal matters due to insufficient reasoning
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed a complaint in criminal matters against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Bern dated December 4, 2025. This Cantonal Court had previously not admitted his complaint, which was directed against the discontinuation order of the Regional Public Prosecutor's Office of Berner Jura-Seeland dated August 7, 2025.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1:** The Cantonal Court of Bern did not admit the complainant's complaint due to lack of standing. - **E.2:** The complainant's submission does not meet the requirements for the reasoning of a complaint to the Federal Court according to Art. 42 para. 2 and Art. 106 para. 2 BGG, particularly regarding a civil claim in the sense of Art. 81 para. 1 lit. b no. 5 BGG. No formal objections in the sense of the so-called "Star-Practice" were raised. The procedure is concluded simplistically according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG, with a brief justification for inadmissibility (Art. 108 para. 3 BGG). - **E.3:** According to Art. 66 para. 1 BGG, court costs of CHF 500.-- are imposed on the complainant.
Summary of the dispositive
The judgment decided that the complaint would not be admitted and imposed court costs of CHF 500.-- on the complainant.
5A_186/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against the order issued by the Chambre de surveillance of the Canton of Geneva on February 5, 2026, which did not grant suspensive effect to his complaint against a wage security protocol of the Geneva Enforcement Office. The complainant also requested the granting of suspensive effect.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1:** The complainant's submission was treated as a civil complaint in the sense of Art. 72 para. 2 lit. a BGG. - **E.2:** The complainant did not comply with the ten-day deadline according to Art. 100 para. 2 lit. a BGG, as the contested order was deemed delivered on February 13, 2026, and the complaint was only submitted to the post on February 24, 2026. - **E.3:** The Federal Court further pointed out that the contested order, which relates to the refusal of suspensive effect, is considered a precautionary measure in the sense of Art. 98 BGG. Therefore, only violations of constitutional rights can be raised, which must be clearly and detailed substantiated (Art. 106 para. 2 BGG). These requirements were not met. - **E.4:** The Federal Court further stated that the arguments brought by the lower court for the rejection of suspensive effect, particularly regarding the non-consideration of health insurance premiums and children's sports costs, were sufficiently and comprehensibly justified. The complainant could not substantively refute these assessments.
Summary of the dispositive
The complaint was declared inadmissible, and the complainant must bear the court costs of CHF 500.
5A_177/2026: Judgment on the issue of custodial placement by the KESB
Summary of the facts
The complainant was placed in custody by the KESB Thun on January 9, 2026. The Cantonal Court of Bern confirmed this measure in response to a complaint on February 4, 2026. The complainant repeatedly approached the Federal Court, particularly with a submission dated February 21, 2026, which was titled as a complaint reasoning and emphasized his rejection of the custodial placement.
Summary of the considerations
The Federal Court examined the submission in which the complainant described his grievances and demanded the repeal of the custodial placement. He claimed to have adhered to agreements and to have no further need for care or treatment. The court found that the complaint did not contain sufficient reasoning, particularly because no legal violation or obviously incorrect finding of facts by the Cantonal Court was presented. Furthermore, the failure of the outpatient setting and the psychological decompensation were thoroughly justified by the Cantonal Court, without the complainant refuting this. The President of the Federal Court did not admit the complaint in the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG. It was decided not to impose court costs (Art. 66 para. 1 BGG).
Summary of the dispositive
The complaint will not be admitted, and no court costs will be imposed.
8C_56/2025: Accident insurance and causal connection
Summary of the facts
A.________ suffered a sprain of the cervical spine and a slight left hand distortion in a car accident on December 23, 2022. Later, a traumatic supra-/infraspinatus tendon rupture on the right side was diagnosed, which was not recognized as accident-related by Suva. The objection raised by A.________ against this and the subsequent complaint were dismissed.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_300/2025: Judgment regarding supplementary benefits for AHV/IV (tariff adjustment and reporting obligation)
Summary of the facts
A.________, acting for her deceased mother B.________, applied for the consideration of a tariff adjustment of the nursing home in the calculation of supplementary benefits for AHV/IV. The compensation office of the Canton of Bern refused this on the grounds of a non-compliance with a reporting deadline of six months. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern confirmed the position of the compensation office. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1374/2025: Non-admission of a complaint regarding the extension of an inpatient therapeutic measure
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed a complaint in criminal matters to the Federal Court after the Cantonal Court of Bern had discontinued an appeal procedure due to the withdrawal of the appeal by the complainant's official defense lawyer. The subject of the procedure was the extension of an inpatient therapeutic measure according to Art. 59 para. 4 StGB.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_607/2024: Judgment regarding a shareholders' agreement: Right of exit and pre-emption right
Summary of the facts
The judgment addresses the legal disputes among shareholders of a company who have signed a shareholders' agreement. The core of the conflict lies in the interpretation of the right of exit and the pre-emption right of the "minority shareholders" against the "majority shareholders." The investors claim financial compensation based on this contract when exercising their rights according to the agreement, while the members of the A.________ family as "majority shareholders" deny their obligations.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_127/2026: Decision on sentencing and cost distribution in a case of assault
Summary of the facts
The complainant was found guilty of assault by the Cantonal Court of Zurich and sentenced to a partially suspended prison sentence of 36 months. She filed a complaint in criminal matters and raised, among other things, the issue of sentencing as well as the non-recognition of replacement measures in the sentence. She also criticized the cost distribution as disproportionate.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_122/2026: Decision on the suspensive effect of complaints related to treatments without consent according to Art. 434 ZGB
Summary of the facts
A.________ was placed in custody on December 12, 2025. After the KESB confirmed the placement, the B.________ clinic ordered a treatment without consent according to Art. 434 ZGB on January 5, 2026. A complaint against this was rejected by the court for custodial placements of the Canton of Basel-Stadt (FU Court). A.________ filed a civil complaint against this decision, requested the repeal of the forced treatment, and submitted a request for free legal aid.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7F_54/2025: Request for revision regarding the judgment of the Federal Court
Summary of the facts
The applicant requested that the judgment of the Federal Court of October 7, 2025 be declared null and that all enforcement, cost, and enforcement consequences be suspended. The request for revision concerns a judgment in a criminal procedure.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_783/2025: Qualified violation of the Narcotics Act and expulsion from the country
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ was secondarily convicted by the Cantonal Court of Zurich for quantitatively qualified violation of the Narcotics Act. She was sentenced to 48 months of imprisonment, the execution of a fine, and an expulsion from the country for 8 years. The complainant requested her acquittal from the Federal Court, the repeal of the expulsion, and the referral of the case for re-evaluation of ancillary consequences.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1233/2025: Rejection of a request for the disqualification of a public prosecutor
Summary of the facts
A.________ demands the disqualification of prosecutor Myriam Bourquin in connection with a criminal investigation against him. The investigation concerns several offenses, including theft, threats, and bodily harm. The complaint is directed against the decision of the criminal chamber of the Cantonal Court of Vaud, which rejected the request for disqualification of the prosecutor. A.________ cites earlier conflicts with the prosecutor from 2015, among other things.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_176/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint against custodial placement
Summary of the facts
The Child and Adult Protection Authority (KESB) Graubünden, branch office Prättigau/Davos, ordered the preparation of a psychiatric report and subsequently the custodial placement of the complainant in the B.________ clinic. Furthermore, the complainant's request for the termination of guardianship was denied. The Cantonal Court of Graubünden rejected her complaint against the custodial placement. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_556/2025: Judgment regarding a request for reconsideration of a residence permit
Summary of the facts
A.________, a national of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, has been in Switzerland since 1987 and received several residence permits, which were extended based on family reunification and post-marital residence rights. After multiple criminal offenses and significant debt, the extension of his permit was ultimately denied. In a request for reconsideration, he claimed that his health condition and the medical care situation in his home country had significantly deteriorated. The cantonal authorities and the Administrative Court of Zurich rejected the request and did not admit it. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_532/2025: Judgment regarding simple bodily harm and assaults
Summary of the facts
A.A.________ was accused of having physically abused B.A.________ multiple times between 2019 and 2021. The incidents included physical altercations during a car ride in 2019, as well as repeated violent assaults until November 2021. The lower court convicted him of simple bodily harm and assaults to a conditional fine and a penalty. A.A.________ requested his acquittal and the repeal of the lower court's judgment from the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_100/2026: Non-admission of a request for revision
Summary of the facts
The complainant submitted a request for revision, which the lower court did not admit. The lower court justified its non-admission by stating that the request did not meet the legal requirements for justification and that the complainant was not processually capable. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1421/2025: Non-admission in criminal proceedings
Summary of the facts
The Cantonal Court of Lucerne did not admit the complainant's complaint against the non-admission order of the Lucerne Public Prosecutor's Office on December 12, 2025. The complainant then filed a complaint in criminal matters with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_692/2025: Judgment on attempted serious bodily harm, sentencing, and expulsion
Summary of the facts
A.________ was sentenced on October 5, 2022, by the District Court of St. Gallen for various offenses (attempted murder, simple bodily harm, brawling, and violations of the Narcotics Act) to a prison sentence of 5 years and 3 months, as well as an expulsion of 12 years. The Cantonal Court of St. Gallen mitigated the sentence on February 20, 2025, and qualified the act as attempted serious bodily harm, but confirmed the expulsion. The complainant requested his acquittal from the charge of attempted serious bodily harm and a waiver of the expulsion from the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_18/2026: Non-admission of a complaint against the discontinuation of a criminal procedure
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint in criminal matters against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Basel-Stadt, which had dismissed the complaint against the discontinuation order of the Basel-Stadt Public Prosecutor's Office. In his submission to the Federal Court, the complainant claimed to have been violated in his rights due to the discontinuation of the criminal proceedings.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_175/2026: Decision on the suspensive effect in a debt enforcement matter
Summary of the facts
The complainant approached the District Court of Kriens regarding debt enforcement issues (attachment, calculation of the existence minimum during enforcement, property valuation), which dismissed his complaint on February 11, 2026, to the extent that it admitted it. After further complaint, the Cantonal Court of Lucerne dismissed his request for a suspensive effect on February 19, 2026. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_11/2026: Dismissal of the complaint for the recognition of a foreign divorce judgment
Summary of the facts
A.________ and B.________, both Serbian nationals, married in 2007 in U.________. After separating in 2008, B.________ moved to Serbia and applied for divorce. In Serbia, a legally binding divorce judgment was issued in 2018. A.________ submitted a unilateral divorce application in Switzerland in 2017, which was rejected by the courts referring to the recognition of the Serbian judgment.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_327/2025: Dismissal of a pension claim by the disability insurance
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ repeatedly registered with the IV office of the Canton of Aargau to apply for disability insurance benefits. After many years of medical assessments and clarifications, the IV office rejected his renewed claim for an invalidity pension on July 5, 2024. The lower court, the insurance court of the Canton of Aargau, confirmed this decision. The complainant then filed a complaint in public law matters with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_438/2025: Non-admission of a complaint in the area of social assistance due to non-payment of a cost advance
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a complaint for refusal or delay of justice. The Department of Health and Social Affairs of the Canton of Aargau decided to dismiss it. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau, which did not admit the complaint on July 22, 2025, due to the untimely payment of the cost advance. In a judgment on July 3, 2025, it had set a final, non-extendable deadline for the advance payment and threatened non-admission in case of non-payment. A.________ subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_1013/2025: Non-admission of a complaint regarding an objection to a penal order
Summary of the facts
The complainant was convicted by penal order on October 28, 2024, among other things, for defamation, identity theft, and copyright infringement. After an objection and failure to appear at the main hearing, the penal order became legally binding. The prosecution chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen dismissed a complaint against the procedural conclusion, after which the complainant turned to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_57/2026: Non-admission of the complaint for the restoration of the deadline in the building police procedure
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a complaint against a building police order from the municipality of Inkwil regarding the restoration of the lawful state. After the Building and Transport Directorate of the Canton of Bern dismissed the complaint on December 1, 2025, A.________ submitted a late complaint to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern, which did not admit it due to the expired deadline. A.________ then requested a restoration of the deadline and filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_774/2025: Judgment on mismanagement, failure to keep accounts, and money laundering
Summary of the facts
A.A.________ was convicted by the Cantonal Court of Zurich in the second instance for mismanagement, failure to keep accounts, and money laundering to a partially suspended prison sentence of 28 months and imposed a 7-year expulsion. Moreover, claims for damages and compensation for several injured parties, as well as joint liability, were pronounced. A.A.________ was acquitted of the charge of multiple deception of a false certification.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_37/2026: Decision on the issue of disqualification of a judge in the context of a divorce proceeding
Summary of the facts
A woman (A.A.) requested the disqualification of the president of the civil court of the district of Lausanne in the divorce proceeding against her husband (B.A.). She justified her request with an alleged violation of her right to be heard and doubts about the impartiality of the judge. The request was rejected by the competent lower courts.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_501/2025: Judgment on sentencing and conditional sentence execution in the case of SVG violation
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ was sentenced for various traffic offenses (multiple obstruction of measures to determine driving ability, negligent failure to control a vehicle, failure to meet the reporting obligation, and further violations of the SVG) by the District Court of Laufenburg to a prison sentence of ten months, a fine of CHF 2,000, and an expulsion. After appeal and partial repeal by the Federal Court, the prison sentence was reduced by the Cantonal Court to nine months, while the expulsion was not ordered again. With the present complaint, A.________ demands the imposition of a conditional or partially conditional sentence as well as a re-evaluation of the cost and compensation arrangement.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_989/2025: Non-admission of the complaint against the decision of the prosecution chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against the decision of the prosecution chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen dated November 27, 2025. The subject of the dispute was the validity of the objection against a penal order regarding SVG violations.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_962/2025: Decision regarding the timeliness of an objection against a penal order
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed an objection on May 20, 2025, against a penal order that was delivered to her on May 7, 2025. The District Court of Höfe did not admit the objection due to lateness in its decision of June 25, 2025. The Cantonal Court of Schwyz dismissed a complaint against this on October 21, 2025. The complainant then approached the Federal Court with a complaint. This is a dispute regarding the timeliness of the objection and the application of procedural rules.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.