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 areas of law.
6B_576/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of Evidence in a Violation of the Narcotics Act
Summary of the Facts
The appellant was found guilty of violating the Narcotics Act by the District Court of Zurich and later by the Cantonal Court of Zurich, and was sentenced to a fine of CHF 1,800.--. She filed an appeal in criminal matters seeking her acquittal, arguing that the evidence had been obtained under unlawful conditions and was therefore inadmissible. She also requested free legal assistance.
Summary of the Considerations
The Cantonal Court of Zurich upheld the conviction of the appellant, noting that the personal check had been conducted on a security police basis according to § 21 of the Cantonal Police Act of Zurich. This check was not arbitrary and was based on objectively understandable police experience. The Federal Court agrees with the assessment of the lower court that there were objective reasons for the check, particularly the extremely nervous behavior of the appellant and the fact that she was known as a drug dealer. The check was also deemed proportionate. The Federal Court does not examine cantonal legal questions in full but only for violations of federal law, such as arbitrariness. It finds that the application of § 21 PolG/ZH by the lower court was not contrary to federal law, and therefore Article 141 paragraph 2 StPO was not violated. The appeal is obviously unfounded and is therefore dismissed. Additionally, the request for free legal assistance is rejected due to lack of prospects for success.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal and the request for free legal assistance were dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on the appellant.
6B_779/2025: Dismissal of the Appeal for Attempted Intentional Homicide
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ was initially convicted of attempted intentional homicide (Art. 112 StGB), violation of privacy using recording devices, driving in an unfit state, and violating the Narcotics Act, receiving a prison sentence of 10 years and 5 months. The sentence considered a slight reduction in culpability. The lower court upheld this judgment. The appellant appealed to the Federal Court, seeking acquittal and alleging various legal violations.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The appellant claims a violation of the right to be heard, particularly an inadequate justification by the lower court. The Federal Court rejects this criticism, considering the justification of the lower court as sufficient. - **E.2:** The appellant asserts a violation of the prohibition of arbitrariness and the presumption of innocence. The Federal Court confirms the evidentiary considerations of the lower court, particularly the intentional forcing of the victim with a vehicle, and dismisses the appeal. - **E.3:** The appellant contests the qualification as attempted murder instead of intentional homicide. The Federal Court confirms a "particular ruthlessness" in the actions, especially due to the planning and execution of the act, as well as the associated guilt. - **E.4:** The appellant criticizes the sentencing, including the consideration of his personal circumstances. The Federal Court considers the imposed prison sentence as appropriate. - **E.5:** The appellant criticizes the order of a stationary therapeutic measure (Art. 59 StGB) and doubts the suitability of this measure. The Federal Court considers the measure proportionate and suitable to counter the high risks of recidivism.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, and the request for free legal assistance was also dismissed, with court costs set at CHF 1,200.
6B_829/2024: Judgment on Forgery
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns the appellant A.________, who was convicted of forgery (Art. 251 StGB). The appellant and his co-owner had submitted building plans to the local municipality in 2010 that deviated from the actual condition of the building. These plans served as the basis for a building permit. The lower court, the Cantonal Court of Valais, classified the plans as false documents and sentenced A.________ to a fine with partial reduction, conditionally suspended, as well as a monetary penalty. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The appeal meets the formal requirements of the Federal Court Act (Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG) and is therefore admissible. - **E.2:** The plans were classified as documents within the meaning of Art. 110 para. 4 StGB. The lower court ruled that these at least qualify as "writings" according to the definition, as they involved intentional and material deception regarding the actual condition of the construction objects. This assessment was confirmed by the Federal Court. - **E.3:** The appellant argued that the plans do not have any special evidentiary value and therefore do not fall under the norm of Art. 251 StGB. The Federal Court rejected this argument. It confirmed that the specific building regulations and practices of the relevant municipality established trust in the accuracy and authenticity of the submitted plans. Therefore, the evidentiary value of the plans was assumed. - **E.4:** The Federal Court examined whether the lower court correctly applied the legal provisions regarding the definition of a false title. It concluded that the lower court correctly interpreted and applied the legal basis for the conviction for forgery.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on the appellant.
8C_461/2025: Recovery of Short-time Work Compensation
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ GmbH, a patient transport company, received short-time work compensation during the COVID-19 pandemic amounting to CHF 517,640.-. After a review by the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), it was found that benefits amounting to CHF 141,488.70 were unlawfully received. SECO ordered the repayment of this amount to the Public Unemployment Insurance Fund Basel-Stadt, which was confirmed by the decision of September 17, 2024. The Federal Administrative Court dismissed the appeal against this decision.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_518/2025: Application for Outings and Granting of Free Legal Assistance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, imprisoned since May 1987 and sentenced to life imprisonment, applied for accompanied outings. This was denied by the cantonal authorities and the cantonal court, partly due to a high risk of recidivism according to psychiatric expertise. He was also denied free legal assistance for the cantonal appeal hearing. The appellant raised violations of the right to humane treatment and equality before the law before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_105/2025: Decision on the Question of a Disability Pension in the Third Application
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________, who suffers from various health impairments, requested a disability pension based on a third application to the disability insurance following a traffic accident in 2020. A medical assessment obtained by the cantonal office of disability insurance established partial work capacity, both in her previous occupation and in an adapted occupation. The cantonal office rejected the granting of a disability pension. The lower court, the Tribunal cantonal Neuchâtel, confirmed this decision. The appellant requested before the Federal Court, among other things, the granting of a permanent full disability pension.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_844/2024: Supplementation of a Foreign Divorce Judgment – Jurisdiction, Maintenance, and Property Division
Summary of the Facts
The parties, A.________ (appellant) and B.________ (respondent), married in 2004 and separated in 2015. The District Court of Stralsund divorced the marriage in 2018 and partially regulated the pension entitlements of the pension equalization. In Switzerland, the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Status of the Canton of St. Gallen recognized the German judgment. Subsequently, several procedures took place, including the supplementation of the divorce judgment regarding post-marital maintenance, child support, and property division. The Cantonal Court of St. Gallen obliged A.________, among other things, to make maintenance payments and a property equalization payment. A.________ challenged this decision before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_800/2025: Inadmissibility of a Revision Request Regarding the Approval of a Maintenance Agreement
Summary of the Facts
A.________, the father of three children, originally obtained approval from the KESB for a maintenance agreement. Years later, he filed a revision request with the KESB to overturn the approval decision, which was denied. After an unsuccessful appeal to the Cantonal Court of Appenzell Innerrhoden, he turned to the Federal Court to have the procedure reviewed again.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_100/2026: Inadmissibility of Provisional Legal Opening Against a Bank
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an appeal against a non-suspensive decision of the Cantonal Court of Zurich, which requested an advance payment for court costs. The Federal Court adjudicated the appeal.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_28/2026: Inadmissibility of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Court against the decision and the resolution of the Cantonal Court of Zurich (III. Criminal Chamber) dated December 9, 2025. The Cantonal Court had partially upheld the appellant's appeal (in connection with an allegation of bodily harm) but had otherwise dismissed it and rejected her request for free legal assistance. The appellant requested that the Cantonal Court's resolution be partially overturned and that free legal assistance be granted in the federal proceedings.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_310/2025: Judgment on Compensation for Helplessness and Intensive Care Allowance
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________, a minor insured person, suffers from various health problems, including Asperger's syndrome. The IV office of the Canton of Zurich granted him benefits for medical measures. A request for helplessness compensation was partially granted: light helplessness for the months of December 2018 to February 2019 and moderate helplessness from March 1, 2019. However, a claim for an intensive care allowance was denied. The insured requested instead in the appeal proceedings a compensation for severe helplessness and the granting of an intensive care allowance. The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the appeal.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_920/2025: Dismissal of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant (A.A.), an Ecuadorian born in Switzerland in 2004, was convicted of attempted intentional homicide, violence or threats against authorities and officials, simple violations of traffic rules, qualified unfitness to drive, and driving without authorization. He had physically attacked and threatened his severely disabled father while under the influence of alcohol. The first-instance court imposed a prison sentence of 42 months, ordered expulsion for eight years, and revoked a previous conditional fine. The appeal instance confirmed the judgment. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Court against this decision.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_335/2025: Decision on Disability Pension and Work Capacity
Summary of the Facts
A.________ suffered a shoulder injury in 2016 and applied for benefits from the IV office of the Canton of St. Gallen. After multiple professional clarifications and medical assessments, particularly by SMAB AG, his pension claim was last denied by the IV office. The Insurance Court of the Canton of St. Gallen granted him a half disability pension for the period from June 1, 2020, to September 30, 2022, which A.________ contested further.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_117/2026: Inadmissibility of the Extradition Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The German and Italian dual citizen A.________ was arrested in Switzerland based on a notice in the Schengen Information System (SIS), and the German authorities requested his extradition for fraud for both prosecution and enforcement. The Federal Office of Justice approved the extradition. A.________ challenged this decision at the Federal Criminal Court, which dismissed the appeal. With an appeal in public law, A.________ requested the Federal Court to overturn the decision and deny the extradition.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_364/2025: Judgment Concerning Disability Insurance (Disability Pension; Revision)
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________, formerly working in horticulture, sustained an injury (contusion trauma of the left shoulder) due to a work accident in 2014. Following investigations by the IV office, he received a quarter pension starting March 2015, later a three-quarter pension from April 2018. After an anterior wall infarction in June 2021, the disability pension was temporarily increased to a full pension. The IV office reduced the pension back to a three-quarter pension starting October 2022. The appellant requested an unlimited full pension and legally challenged the decision.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_98/2026: Decision on Jurisdiction and Admissibility of an Appeal in Criminal Matters
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Court against a decision of the Chambre pénale de recours of the Court of Justice of the Republic and Canton of Geneva dated December 19, 2025, which confirmed a previous decision of the Geneva Public Prosecutor not to take up a criminal complaint for calumny, defamation, and "moral harassment at work." A.________ also requested free legal assistance.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_994/2025: Prevention of Measures to Determine Unfitness to Drive
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ disregarded the "No Entry" sign and collided due to insufficient attention with a traffic sign, causing property damage of approximately CHF 1,200.--. He unlawfully left the accident scene and later consumed alcohol at his residence, preventing the determination of his unfitness to drive. The Deputy District Court Judge of Bucheggberg-Wasseramt convicted him on September 12, 2023, and the Cantonal Court of Solothurn confirmed this judgment on September 10, 2025, with an adjustment of the daily rate. The appellant filed a criminal appeal with the Federal Court against this decision.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_677/2025: Decision on the Claim for Disability Pension
Summary of the Facts
A.________, born in 1967 and working as a mason, filed a request for disability insurance benefits in March 2022 due to complete work incapacity resulting from heart disease. The competent authority (UAI) rejected the application for a disability pension with a decision dated April 16, 2025. The medical assessment determined complete work incapacity until February 2023 and an 80% work capacity in light, adapted activities from that point. The degree of disability was assessed as insufficient for pension benefits (22% from February 2023 and 30% from January 2024). A.________ challenged this decision at the Cantonal Insurance Court of Ticino. This court dismissed the appeal with a decision dated October 30, 2025. Subsequently, A.________ appealed to the Federal Court requesting the granting of a full disability pension for the period from February 1, 2023, to April 30, 2024, or a referral for renewed medical clarification.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_516/2025: Inadmissibility of the Subsequent Building Permit for a Waste Shredder
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns the subsequent building permit for a waste shredder on a property in the industrial zone of the municipality of Quinto (formerly Prato Leventina). The admissibility of the shredder was questioned by the administrative judiciary of the Canton of Ticino, as the device was classified as "heavy industry" and is not permitted in this zone according to the applicable zoning regulations (Art. 43 vNAPR).
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_13/2026: Initiation of the Appeal Regarding Legal Opening and Suspensive Effect
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an appeal with the Cantonal Court of Aargau against decisions of the District Court of Aarau, which granted provisional legal opening to the respondent. The Cantonal Court of Aargau denied the request for a suspensive effect. Subsequently, the appellant appealed to the Federal Court and requested free legal assistance. The Federal Court decided on the admissibility of the appeal and the application for free legal assistance.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_488/2024: Procedural Conclusion by Withdrawal of the Appeal in a Public Law Proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ AG, B.________, and C.________ filed an appeal in public law matters on August 19, 2024, against the decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz dated May 15, 2024, which confirmed the building permit for a neighborhood access road. After several extensions of the suspension due to ongoing settlement talks, the appellants declared the withdrawal of the appeal with submission dated February 26, 2026.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_447/2025: Free Legal Assistance in the Contact Rights Proceedings of the Child's Father
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns a father, A.________, who claims contact and visitation rights for two of his children. Due to reports of domestic violence and violations of visitation bans, his visitation rights were revoked by decisions at the cantonal level. He requested free legal assistance for the cantonal proceedings, which was denied due to the lack of prospects for success. This rejection was ultimately reviewed by the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_141/2026: Inadmissibility of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant contested a non-admission decision of the Cantonal Court of Zurich regarding the suspension of a divorce proceedings. The Federal Court found that the suspension order had already expired at the time of the appeal and that the appellant also had no legitimate interest. Furthermore, there was a lack of request requirements and justification, which is why the appeal was regarded as obviously inadmissible.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4D_241/2025: Inadmissibility
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an appeal against the decision of the Cantonal Court of Zurich, I. Civil Chamber, after it dismissed the original appeal due to lack of handwritten signature. The Federal Court set a deadline for the appellant to pay a cost advance, which was not met. It was noted that in case of default, the legal remedy would not be admitted.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5D_66/2024: Easement Law: Clarification of the Exercise and the Location of an Easement
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns an easement of passage in favor of several parcels, which encumbers another parcel. The parties disputed the exact location of the easement as well as the removal of obstacles to it. The dispute dates back to a notarial act from 1975, which established the easement on a then-existing map. Various developments and uses led to disagreement, especially after the current owner of the encumbered parcel made changes to the use and access.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_119/2026: Inadmissibility of an Appeal Regarding Search Warrant and Access to Files
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a criminal appeal against an order of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne, which did not enter into her original appeal regarding the search warrant and access to files. The reason for the inadmissibility was the absence of an original signature despite multiple requests.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_99/2026: Decision on the Non-Admittance of the Appeal in Criminal Law
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal appeal on January 23, 2026, against the decision of the Chambre pénale de recours of the Court of Justice of Geneva dated December 19, 2025. This court had rejected A.________'s appeal against a non-admission order of the Geneva Public Prosecutor dated September 29, 2025. A.________ claimed to have been a victim of calumny (slander), defamation, and "moral harassment at work" and requested free legal assistance.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_731/2024: Judgment on the Appeal Against the Judgment of the Cantonal Court of Lucerne (Threats, Assaults)
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ was originally convicted by a penalty order for threats and assaults to a conditional fine and a penalty. After several instances and a referral by the Federal Court, he was ultimately found guilty again by the Cantonal Court of Lucerne and sentenced to a reduced fine and penalty. A.A.________ filed an appeal against this judgment with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_74/2026: Conclusion of an Appeal Procedure by Withdrawal of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, an investment fund company domiciled in the Cayman Islands, filed a seizure request with the District Court of Zurich, which was partially granted. After an objection by the respondents, the proceedings were continued to the Cantonal Court of Zurich, where the representation relationships of the appellant were disputed. The Cantonal Court decided not to consider certain submissions and communications and dismissed the request to change the representation. The subsequent appeal in civil matters to the Federal Court was withdrawn by the appellant, thus concluding the proceedings.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
1C_152/2024: Judgment on the Demolition of a Shell Construction by Substitute Performance
Summary of the Facts
A shell construction that had been standing still since 2013 in the municipality of Freienbach on the parcels KTN 5 and KTN 3666 was subjected to various official orders (including deadlines, fines, threats, and finally an order for substitute performance) for completion or demolition. After several warnings and fines, the municipal council ordered on June 15, 2023, the substitute performance of the demolition down to the foundation slab. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz confirmed this order on January 25, 2024. The appellant filed an appeal against this decision with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_152/2026: Conclusion of Proceedings by Withdrawal of the Appeal in Civil Matters
Summary of the Facts
The parents of the common children C.________ and D.________ disputed the enforceability of the marriage protection decision of the District Court of Willisau, which regulated the separation, particularly custody, visitation rights, and child support. The appellant requested a delay in the enforceability from the Cantonal Court of Lucerne, which was initially granted superprovisionally but later denied. The appellant then filed an appeal in civil matters with the Federal Court but later withdrew it.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_629/2025: Withdrawal of an Appeal in the Area of Accident Insurance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Court on October 27, 2025, against a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Neuchâtel (decision of September 17, 2025), along with a request for free legal assistance. The Federal Court rejected the request on December 2, 2025, as the appeal had no prospect of success, and required a payment of court costs of 800 francs within 14 days. On February 2, 2026, A.________ declared the withdrawal of the appeal.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_274/2025: Claim for Disability Pension
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, born in 1966, registered in January 2020 for benefits from the IV office of the Canton of St. Gallen due to a work incapacity due to psychological reasons. A medical assessment attested to a slight impairment, which led the IV office to grant a quarter pension. Subsequent investigations resulted in a new decision that rejected the pension request at an invalidity degree of 27%. The lower court confirmed this rejection decision.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.