Latest Rulings of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most recent rulings of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three rulings, we present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the other rulings, you will find a summary of the facts. Full summaries of all rulings are available on the Lexplorer portal. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest rulings tailored to your areas of law.
8C_423/2024: Ruling on Social Assistance/Emergency Aid for Asylum Seekers with Multiple Applications
Summary of the Facts
The complainants, a six-member family from Burundi, entered Switzerland for the first time in 2022, where their asylum application was processed under the Dublin procedure. After being transferred to Croatia according to the Dublin Regulation and re-entering Switzerland, they submitted another asylum application. During this procedure, they requested social assistance instead of the granted emergency aid, which the authorities rejected. The cantonal administrative court upheld the exclusion from social assistance and the provision of emergency aid.
Summary of the Considerations
- E.1: The Federal Court establishes the basic jurisdiction to assess the complaint and affirms the existence of the prerequisites for judgment. - E.2: The legal basis for the review of the complaint (Art. 95, 96 BGG) and the limited scope of review regarding cantonal law are explained. - E.3: The disputed issue concerns the claim of the complainants to social assistance instead of emergency aid. The lower court supported the complainants' claim to emergency aid and excluded any entitlement to social assistance. - E.4–E.5: The legal bases at the federal level (Art. 81, 82 Asylum Act) and cantonal level (Solothurn Social Law) as well as the prerequisites for emergency aid instead of social assistance are outlined. Complainants with multiple applications generally only have a claim to emergency aid. - E.6: The multiple application of the complainants does not lead to any claim for social assistance, as Switzerland has fully fulfilled its obligations from the first Dublin procedure. The exclusion from social assistance is lawful according to the applicable regulations. - E.7: The complainants cannot assert any claims under the EU Reception Directive 2013/33/EU, as it is not applicable in Switzerland. The granted emergency aid meets the constitutional requirements according to Art. 12 BV.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint of the family is dismissed; at the same time, they receive free legal aid, and the court costs are provisionally covered by the Federal Court.
2C_723/2025: Deportation Detention of a Ukrainian National
Summary of the Facts
The Ukrainian national A.________, who was sentenced to 6.5 years in prison and a ten-year expulsion for serious crimes, re-entered Switzerland illegally in 2024 despite having been expelled and committed further offenses. He was arrested in October 2025 in Basel and placed in deportation detention by the Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich. The complaint against the detention order was dismissed by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines the prerequisites for admission ex officio and finds that the complaint concerning deportation detention is admissible. The asylum applications or requests for onward travel to another country are not subject to the proceedings. The Federal Court outlines the prerequisites for deportation detention according to Art. 76 Asylum Act: a legally binding expulsion or deportation decision, the foreseeability of enforcement, a reason for detention, and the proportionality of the detention. The lower court fundamentally considered the prerequisites for detention as fulfilled, particularly the reason for detention based on the expulsion. The Federal Court confirms that the expulsion remains valid even after a deportation and can serve as the basis for renewed detention. Regarding the asylum application, it is noted that this has no impact on the admissibility of the detention due to the expulsion. A.________ argues that a renewed deportation to Ukraine is not permissible, as he would suffer torture and inhumane treatment there. His assertions regarding individual dangers and his health situation were not sufficiently examined by the lower courts, which constitutes a violation of his rights. The Federal Court overturns the contested judgment and refers the case back to the lower court for additional factual clarification and a new decision. Immediate release from detention is denied due to his threat to public safety.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint is upheld, and the case is referred back to the lower court for a new decision. No court costs are charged.
4D_52/2025: Ruling on Definitive Legal Opening in a Family Law Proceeding
Summary of the Facts
The complainant initiated collection proceedings for maintenance claims for the twins and herself based on the divorce decree from 2017. The lower court reduced the originally awarded amount by the first instance and only issued a definitive legal opening for a remaining amount of CHF 2,392.--.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court found that due to the amount in dispute, the complaint should be treated as a subsidiary constitutional complaint. A review occurs only with sufficiently substantiated grievances (Art. 117 in conjunction with Art. 106 para. 2 BGG). According to Art. 80 para. 1 SchKG, the creditor may request definitive legal opening upon presentation of an enforceable title. The debtor must prove the repayment of a debt with documents. Maintenance for children beyond maturity until the completion of initial education is subject to the condition of completing the education. The lower court mistakenly assumed that the maintenance obligation for the adult child ended with their maturity. The Federal Court clarified that the maintenance obligation according to the divorce agreement lasted until the regular completion of initial education. The complainant was allowed to partially consider the payments from the opposing party in this context as repayment of amounts for the adult child. The Federal Court criticized that the lower court incorrectly assessed the actual division of the payments from the opposing party and thus fell into arbitrariness. The amount paid by the opposing party should also have included shares for the maintenance of the adult child.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Court overturned the lower court's judgment and granted the complainant a definitive legal opening for a higher amount, as well as the cost coverage by the opposing party.
8C_258/2025: Ruling Regarding Disability Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant applied multiple times for benefits from the Disability Insurance (IV). After initially being granted pension benefits (2008–2010), a later application (2018) was rejected. On June 5, 2023, the complainant submitted another application, based on a cancer diagnosis and disc problems. The IV office in Bern rejected the claim on September 20, 2024, due to a disability degree of 33%. This decision was subsequently confirmed by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern in a ruling on March 24, 2025.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_686/2025: Ruling on Expulsion Due to Attempted Intentional Homicide
Summary of the Facts
A.________, an Afghan national, was sentenced by the Regional Court of Oberland on June 6, 2023, for attempted intentional homicide and multiple threats to a prison sentence of 6 years, a conditional fine of 100 daily rates of CHF 10.–, and an expulsion for eight years. The Cantonal Court of Bern confirmed the judgment on August 29, 2024. With a criminal complaint, A.________ requested to overturn the expulsion and its entry in the Schengen Information System (SIS).
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
4A_97/2025: Dispute over the Early Termination of a Lease Agreement for Business Premises
Summary of the Facts
Dispute over the early termination of a lease agreement for business premises and the related obligation to pay rent until the end of the fixed rental period. Plaintiffs (A.________ and B.________) sought damages from the defendant (C.________ AG) for investments made in the leased property and disputed rent claims after the early return of the leased item. The dispute particularly concerned whether the defendant sufficiently complied with its duty to mitigate damages according to Art. 264 para. 3 OR.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
7B_104/2026: Ruling Regarding Refusal of Justice and Non-Admission
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against the ruling of the Cantonal Court of Aargau dated January 13, 2026. In the lower court, her evidence requests were temporarily dismissed, and the request for suspension of the criminal proceedings and a further extension for submitting the appeal justification were denied. The complainant alleges a refusal of justice and requests the suspension of the scheduled appeal hearing.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
7B_696/2025: Non-Admission Due to Failure to Provide the Cost Advance
Summary of the Facts
The complainants filed a criminal complaint against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Zurich, III. Criminal Chamber, dated July 10, 2025. After unsuccessful delivery and multiple requests under deadlines, the complainants did not provide the requested cost advance.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
5A_160/2026: Decision Regarding Expert Opinion in Marriage Protection Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
In the context of marriage protection proceedings before the District Court of Zurich, a combined adult psychiatric and child psychology expert opinion regarding the parties' parenting ability was ordered. The complainant filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of Zurich against the appointment of the experts, which the Cantonal Court dismissed. Subsequently, a complaint in civil matters was filed with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
1C_480/2025: Refusal of Transfer of a Convicted French National to France
Summary of the Facts
A French national convicted in Switzerland (based on his conviction for attempted qualified robbery, threats, and other offenses) requested his transfer to France to serve the remaining sentence. The Federal Office of Justice denied the request, stating that enforcement in Switzerland does not jeopardize his reintegration. The complaint of the convicted person to the lower courts was not processed due to lack of standing to sue.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_653/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against Conviction for Violation of Traffic Rules
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (A.________) was found guilty by the District Court of La Côte on January 28, 2025, of simple violation of traffic rules and was sentenced to a fine of CHF 400. Additionally, procedural costs of CHF 700 were imposed, and a substitute prison sentence of four days was determined. The appeal to the Cantonal Court of Vaud was unsuccessful. Against the judgment of the Cantonal Court dated April 24, 2025, the complainant appealed to the Federal Court, requesting his acquittal.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
1C_646/2025: Recusal Request
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ originally requested access to certain documents from the Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner (EDÖB) concerning an application operated by Y.________ AG. Due to the anonymization of the opposing parties, both Y.________ AG and A.________ filed a complaint. During the proceedings, A.________ requested the recusal of Judge Stephan Metzger and Court Clerk Thomas Ritter as well as the disclosure of the identity of Y.________ AG. These requests were denied by the Federal Administrative Court, a decision that was subsequently overturned by the Federal Court regarding the right to be heard. However, upon re-examination, the lower court confirmed the decision.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
5A_1102/2025: Ruling on a Complaint Regarding the Provisional Registration of a Construction Worker Lien
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ AG carried out plastering work based on a work contract with B.________ AG on two properties owned by B.________ AG. A.________ AG requested the provisional registration of construction worker liens, which the District Court of Appenzell Innerrhoden rejected due to lack of substantiation. The appeal to the Cantonal Court of Appenzell Innerrhoden was also rejected, and the super-provisionally registered liens were canceled. A.________ AG filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
8C_476/2025: Decision on New Registration with Disability Insurance and Pension Entitlement
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, born in 1978, re-registered for disability insurance after an initial registration denial in 2014 in July 2019 and requested benefits (professional integration/pension) based on back and head pain as well as depression. After various medical evaluations, including two multidisciplinary reports, the IV Office of the Canton of Zurich concluded that A.________ does not have a significantly reduced earning capacity. By decision of December 10, 2024, the IV Office rejected the request for benefits. A complaint against this decision was dismissed by the Social Security Court of the Canton of Zurich on June 6, 2025.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
8C_22/2026: Ruling on Social Assistance (Procedure Prerequisite)
Summary of the Facts
The Political Municipality of Hinwil reduced the basic need for social assistance for the livelihood of A.________ by 30% for six months starting October 1, 2025. A.________ filed a complaint against this, which the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich qualified as late on December 2, 2025, and did not admit. A.________ subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court against this decision.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_809/2025: Ruling of the Federal Court 6B_809/2025
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ was partially convicted by the District Court of Broye and Nord-Vaud for qualified simple bodily injury, insult, qualified threat, and coercion. The Cantonal Court of Vaud as the appellate instance partially modified the decision but confirmed essential convictions. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court, particularly contesting the violation of the right to be heard and the assessment of evidence, as well as the violation of his presumption of innocence.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
7B_1080/2024: Complaint Regarding the Seizure of Confiscated Assets upon Discontinuation and Compensation Consequences
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was checked upon entering Switzerland with EUR 101,150.-- in cash, with drug residues found in various places in the vehicle and on the banknotes. The criminal proceedings for money laundering, handling stolen goods, and drug offenses were discontinued; however, EUR 100,000.-- of confiscated cash was seized. The Cantonal Court of Schaffhausen dismissed the complaint against this, but made adjustments to compensation decisions.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2C_449/2025: Decision on the Inadmissibility of a Request for Suspension of Administrative Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was responsible for two massage parlors in the Canton of Geneva operated by E.________ company. In the past, he had been repeatedly warned and fined by the responsible cantonal department (Department of Institutions and Digital) for violations of legal requirements, including in connection with the management of the salons and employing persons without valid work permits. During a police investigation, drugs and prescription medications were found in one of the salons. There were also indications of unsafe sexual practices and the company's involvement in the distribution of these substances. The department subsequently decided on the definitive closure of both salons and imposed a ten-year operating ban on A.________.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_871/2024: Ruling Regarding Qualified Serious Violation of Traffic Rules
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was involved in a self-accident on the evening of August 17, 2020, at a speed of at least 143 km/h outside built-up areas (permitted: 80 km/h). He left the road with his vehicle, crossed a meadow and a side road, broke through a hedge, and eventually collided with a parked SUV. The District Court of Weinfelden sentenced A.________ on February 29, 2024, for qualified serious violation of traffic rules according to Art. 90 para. 3 SVG to a conditional prison sentence of 18 months and a fine of CHF 2,000.–. After this judgment was confirmed by the Cantonal Court of Thurgau, the complainant requested the complete cancellation of the sentence or a referral for a new decision before the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_621/2025: Dismissal of the Complaint Against Acquittal of Defamation Charges
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint against a ruling of the Cantonal Court of Valais, which confirmed the first instance ruling of the District Court of Monthey. This acquitted B.B.________ and C.B.________ of the charge of defamation and fully dismissed the civil claims of A.________. The defamation charges concerned statements made by the respondents in the context of an opposition to a building application by the complainant.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_454/2024: Inadmissibility of the Request for Revision
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint against B.________ for forgery in 2018. This related to a disputed cost estimate document that B.________ had used as justification for the registration of a construction worker lien mortgage. The lower court (Ministry of the Public Prosecutor) did not admit the criminal complaint, a decision that was confirmed by the Federal Court (Judgment 6B_510/2020). In 2024, A.________ filed a request for revision against the judgment of the lower court (dated 14.02.2020), based on new evidence. However, the cantonal instance declared the revision inadmissible, as the prerequisites for legal remedies were not fulfilled.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_7/2024: Conviction for Defilement and Multiple Attempted Defilement, as well as Questions Regarding Official Defense and Activity Ban
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was accused of exploiting the incapacity for resistance of a minor victim in three incidents between December 2019 and May 2020 to perform or attempt sexual acts on this victim. The District Court of Meilen convicted him, among other things, of defilement (Art. 191 StGB) and multiple attempted defilement to a conditional fine and a lifelong activity ban. The Cantonal Court of Zurich confirmed the judgment on appeal. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court, including a request for acquittal and the retroactive appointment of his defender as an official defender.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2C_300/2023: Exemption from Swimming Lessons for Religious Reasons
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ and B.A.________, as members of the Palmarian Church, requested from the school board of their son D.A.________ (born 2016) an exemption from swimming lessons in primary school for religious reasons. After the school board rejected the request and following unsuccessful cantonal legal remedies, the Cantonal Court of Uri held that the public interest in mandatory swimming lessons takes precedence over private religious reasons. The complainants then appealed to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2D_22/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a national of the Republic of Congo, received a residence permit in 2021 for studying at the University of Lausanne, valid until December 2023. After completing his master's degree, a request for a work permit was denied, and consequently, the Canton of Vaud rejected a residence permit for dependent employment. A later application for extension of the study permit in 2025 was also denied, as the purpose of his stay in Switzerland had already been achieved by the obtained degree. A.________ filed a complaint against this, which was dismissed by the cantonal court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
9C_328/2025: Dismissal of the Complaint Against Unlimited Tax Liability in the Canton of Ticino
Summary of the Facts
The taxpayer A.________ reported on December 16, 2018, the change of residence from U.________ (TI) to V.________ (GR). The tax authorities of the Canton of Ticino continued to assume unlimited tax liability in the Canton. The taxpayer initially contested this assumption with appeals and later with a complaint to the Federal Court. He requested the recognition of the Canton of Graubünden as his main tax domicile and raised several procedural and factual issues.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_1007/2024: Dismissal of the Complaint Due to Unlawful Appropriation and Violation of the Weapons Act
Summary of the Facts
A dispute between A.________ and her former partner B.________ concerned the alleged theft of a collection of firearms valued at approximately CHF 30,000, which had previously been stored in a secret hiding place in their shared home. A.________ was convicted by the lower court for unlawful appropriation and negligent violation of the Weapons Act, prompting her to file a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_842/2025: Violation of the Prosecution Principle and the Right to be Heard
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was partially found guilty by the Police Court of the District of La Côte for violating traffic regulations (Art. 90 para. 2 SVG) and was sentenced to a fine and a penalty. The subsequent appeal to the Criminal Appeals Court of the Cantonal Court of Vaud was unsuccessful, with a reduction of the fine. A.________ filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Court, alleging particularly the violation of the prosecution principle (Art. 9 StPO) and the right to be heard (Art. 29 para. 2 BV).
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
8C_14/2026: Procedure Prerequisite in the Area of Unemployment Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was ordered by the unemployment fund of the Canton of Zurich to refund overpaid daily allowances amounting to CHF 5,390.30. The Social Security Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the complaint filed against this. It determined that the complainant's activity at B.________ GmbH could not be classified as a secondary occupation and the calculation of the insured earnings based on a twelve-month period was correct. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against this judgment.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_680/2025: Ruling on the Complaint Against a Ruling of the Criminal Appeals Instance of the Canton of Vaud
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court dealt with the complaint of A.________ against a ruling of the Criminal Appeals Instance of the Canton of Vaud. A.________ was sentenced to 36 months of imprisonment for, among other things, rape and various other sexual offenses such as sexual acts with children and pornography, 30 months of which were suspended. He particularly denied his conviction for rape and the determination of the sentence.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
8C_37/2026: Ruling on Social Assistance (Procedure Prerequisite)
Summary of the Facts
The complainant challenged a ruling of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, which confirmed the refusal of social assistance benefits by the social welfare office of Lindau. The Administrative Court had applied cantonal law and determined that no need had been demonstrated.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
8C_637/2025: Recovery of Wrongfully Received Benefits
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, born in 1958, received a full disability pension from 2007 as well as supplementary benefits and reimbursements for illness and disability costs from 2015. After a final criminal judgment from the Cantonal Court of Zurich in 2025 for fraud and wrongful receipt of social security benefits, the Social Security Institution of the Canton of Zurich (SVA) demanded a total of CHF 85,638.75 in wrongfully received benefits back. The Social Security Court of the Canton of Zurich reduced this amount in the first-instance judgment to CHF 75,113.75. The complainant subsequently appealed to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
8C_464/2025: Ruling on Disability Pension and Income Comparison After an Accident
Summary of the Facts
An employee (A.________) suffered an accident with a radius fracture during his work in 2022. The Suva initially provided statutory benefits and granted a compensation for integrity of 15%, but excluded entitlement to a disability pension. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau confirmed this decision. The complainant requested the Federal Court to overturn the first-instance ruling.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_103/2026: Dismissal of a Complaint Procedure Due to Withdrawal of the Complaint
Summary of the Facts
Lawyer B.________ filed a criminal complaint on behalf of A.________ against a ruling of the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft. However, A.________ denied having authorized the lawyer to submit the complaint and requested the dismissal of the proceedings without cost consequences.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
9C_28/2026: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against the Decision of the Social Security Court
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ challenged the decision of the Social Security Court of the Canton of Zurich dated December 1, 2025, which dismissed the request for restoration of the deadline and did not admit her complaint against the objection decision of CSS Kranken-Versicherung AG dated October 9, 2025. The subject of the complaint was the cost participation amounting to CHF 1,294.85.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6F_8/2024: Inadmissibility of the Revision
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ requested the revision of the Federal Court ruling 6B_510/2020 dated September 15, 2020. He argued that there is a new piece of evidence, namely a civil judgment dated December 14, 2023, which would demonstrate the significance of a previous document (a cost estimate) for his criminal case. The lower courts had dismissed both the original criminal complaint and the complaint and revision, particularly because no sufficient new facts were presented.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
5A_158/2026: Non-Admission of a Complaint in a Debt Collection Matter
Summary of the Facts
The St. Gallen Debt Collection Office seized the complainant's income to the extent that it exceeds his subsistence minimum. The complainant filed a complaint against the seizure document with the District Court of St. Gallen, which rejected it to the extent that it admitted it. He then filed a complaint with the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen; this court did not admit it due to lack of jurisdiction and insufficient reasoning. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_969/2025: Abuse of Trust; Right to be Heard; Arbitrariness
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ was sentenced by the District Court of La Côte on March 31, 2023, for abuse of trust to the detriment of his mother to a conditional prison sentence of 18 months. The mother, who was health-compromised, had been represented by her son in financial and administrative matters between January and May 2019. He exceeded his mandate by transferring CHF 203,228.90 from his mother's accounts to his own accounts without her consent and purchasing a vehicle. The criminal judgment was confirmed by the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Vaud on July 24, 2025. A.A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against this.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2C_631/2025: Dismissal of the Complaint Against the Rejection of the Residence Permit
Summary of the Facts
The Portuguese national A.________, residing in Switzerland since 2011, applied for the renewal of her EU/EFTA residence permit and for its conversion into a settlement permit. Due to insufficient financial means, the absence of the quality of "employee" according to the Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons (FZA), and the receipt of social assistance, both applications were rejected. In addition, an expulsion decision was issued. The lower court (Cantonal Court of Vaud, Administrative and Criminal Division) confirmed these decisions.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
7B_1275/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against the Decision of the Prosecutor
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint against a decision of the Geneva prosecutor. He had denied his evidence requests, particularly the hearing of a witness (D.________), citing that a non-initiation order regarding the factual statements of the complainant was already final. The lower court confirmed this decision and declared the appeal of A.________ inadmissible.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_518/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against the Expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.A.________, was sentenced by the District Court of the District of Est Vaudois on June 28, 2024, among other things, for attempted theft, property damage, and trespassing to a prison sentence of four months and a five-year expulsion. This sentence was also confirmed in the appeal hearing of the Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Vaud on April 2, 2025. A.A.________, a Kosovo national, was additionally ordered the entry of the expulsion in the Schengen Information System (SIS) and the seizure of tools of the crime.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
5A_93/2026: Decision on the Inadmissibility of a Complaint Regarding Provisional Measures in Child and Adult Protection
Summary of the Facts
The unmarried, separated parents of a child born in 2024 disputed the right to determine the child's residence. The Child and Adult Protection Authority (KESB) Biel/Bienne provisionally revoked the mother's right to determine the child's residence on September 26, 2025, and placed the child in a care facility. The Cantonal Court of Bern dismissed the mother's complaint against these measures on January 16, 2026, to the extent that it admitted it. The mother requested the Federal Court to review the case without providing sufficiently substantiated constitutional grievances.
Full summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.