Latest Judgments of the Federal Supreme Court
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Supreme Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the further judgments, you will find a summary of the facts in each case. The complete summaries of all judgments are available on the Lexplorer portal. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments individually tailored to your fields of law.
7B_9/2025: Judgment concerning rape, sentencing, and violation of the principle in dubio pro reo
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was initially convicted by the Schaffhausen Cantonal Court for multiple bodily injuries and pornography, but acquitted of more serious allegations including rape and incest. After an appeal by the public prosecutor and subsequent appeals by other parties, the Schaffhausen Court of Appeal changed the judgment and convicted A.________ inter alia for rape, against which he filed a complaint at the Federal Supreme Court. After a remand decision, the case was re-assessed by the Court of Appeal, which confirmed the prison sentence of 15 months and a conditional fine of 172 daily rates. A.________ again filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the Considerations
1. **Jurisdictional Requirements (Para. 1):** - The requirements for appeals in criminal matters according to Art. 78 et seq. BGG are met; however, the appeal is partly inadmissible.
2. **Invalidity of Interrogations (Paras. 2, 3):** - The Federal Supreme Court has already ruled certain statements inadmissible. However, this does not exclude consequential evidence. - New objections regarding the admissibility of other evidence are inadmissible as they were not part of the remand proceedings.
3. **Evaluation of Evidence and in dubio pro reo (Para. 4):** - The lower court relied on consistent statements of the injured party as well as supporting testimonies confirming the allegations. - Neither arbitrariness nor violation of the principle in dubio pro reo occurred.
4. **Sentencing (Para. 5):** - The lower court correctly assessed the sentence considering retrospective concurrence and prior convictions. No excess of discretion is apparent.
5. **Cost Allocation (Para. 6):** - The cost allocation in the appeal proceedings complies with the law; the allegation of incorrect calculation or insufficient reasoning is unfounded.
6. **Overall Assessment (Para. 7):** - The appeal is dismissed because it does not demonstrate substantiated errors.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal is dismissed, court costs are imposed on A.________, and the request for legal aid is rejected as the appeal is considered to have no prospects of success.
5D_4/2026: Judgment on the subsidiary constitutional complaint concerning a super-provisional measure
Summary of the Facts
The complainant applied to the St. Gallen District Court for the super-provisional release of a television set held by the respondent. The District Court rejected the request. The St. Gallen Cantonal Court did not admit the complainant’s appeal against this decision. The complainant then filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the Considerations
- **Para. 1:** The subsidiary constitutional complaint was directed against the dismissal of a super-provisional measure by the District Court. According to established case law, such measures are generally not appealable (Art. 75 para. 1 BGG; BGE 137 III 417, 140 III 289 para. 1.1). The complainant’s allegations of a risk of enforcement obstruction were not substantiated, so no exceptional case exists. - **Para. 2:** The complaint is manifestly inadmissible. The president decides in simplified procedure on non-admission (Art. 117 in conjunction with Art. 108 para. 1 lit. a BGG). - **Para. 3:** The court costs are imposed on the complainant due to the outcome of the proceedings (Art. 66 para. 1 BGG). Despite indication of his indigence, he did not file a request for legal aid; such a request would have been rejected anyway due to the lack of prospects of success (Art. 64 para. 1 BGG).
Summary of the Dispositive
It was decided not to admit the constitutional complaint. The court costs were imposed on the complainant, who did not file a request for legal aid.
9C_354/2025: Request for suspension of proceedings
Summary of the Facts
An aircraft, in which A.________ holds a 10% co-ownership share and which is operated by the B.________ flying club, conducted a domestic flight within Switzerland in 2019. The Federal Office for Customs and Border Security (BAZG) subsequently levied import duties amounting to CHF 339,750.30. The complainants requested the suspension of the proceedings before the Federal Administrative Court in order to obtain information about rulings by the BAZG. The Federal Administrative Court rejected this, whereupon the complaint was filed with the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The contested interim ruling is appealable under Art. 93 para. 1 BGG only if it may cause an irreparable legal disadvantage or bring about a final decision. The disadvantage must be legal in nature; factual disadvantages are insufficient. The requirements for appealability are to be interpreted restrictively. The complainants must demonstrate why an irreparable disadvantage exists. It is examined whether the refusal of the suspension causes an irreparable disadvantage. The complainants rely on a conditional claim of equal treatment in unlawfulness and allegedly require the contested rulings for this. They claim a violation of the right to be heard. The principle of investigation applies before the Federal Administrative Court. The lower court must establish the facts ex officio and may consider relevant documents later in the proceedings. A final decision against the complainants remains possible and appealable. The BAZG argues the complainants’ rights are preserved and no irreparable disadvantage threatens. The requirements of Art. 93 para. 1 lit. a BGG are not met. There is also a lack of a qualified reasoning on the violation of constitutional rights pursuant to Art. 106 para. 2 BGG.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court did not admit the complaint and imposed the court costs on the complainants. Additionally, a new deadline was set for submitting the reply.
5A_111/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns the dispute between A.________ and B.________, the unmarried parents of C.________, regarding parental rights and maintenance contributions. After various proceedings in Switzerland and Belgium, C.________ was placed under institutional care. The lower courts decided that B.________ receives sole parental custody and the right to determine residence, and that A.________ is obliged to pay maintenance contributions. The case involves international jurisdiction issues according to the 1996 Hague Convention (CLaH96).
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_650/2025: Judgment on advance payment of costs and non-admission in connection with claims for damages under Art. 52 AHVG
Summary of the Facts
The Schwyz compensation office obliged the complainant (A.________) to pay damages pursuant to Art. 52 AHVG. This claim was reduced after an objection procedure. An appeal was filed against the subsequent decision of the Schwyz Administrative Court, which the cantonal court did not admit on 10 October 2025 due to non-payment of the advance payment of costs.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_49/2026: Inadmissibility regarding advance payment of costs and allegations of denial of justice and bias
Summary of the Facts
The complainant challenged a ruling by the Appenzell Ausserrhoden Court of Appeal, which ordered her to pay an advance on costs in proceedings concerning denial of justice or state liability. She alleged bias of the single judge, requested annulment of the ruling, and demanded delegation of the proceedings to a court outside the canton. Furthermore, she complained that her request for legal aid was not considered.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_387/2025: Dismissal of legal aid in connection with disability insurance
Summary of the Facts
A.________, the complainant, challenged two decisions of the IV office Bern concerning suspension and reimbursement of helplessness benefits and assistance contributions. In the cantonal proceedings, he filed a request for legal aid, which was rejected by the Bern Administrative Court due to violation of the duty to cooperate. He then filed a public law complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_380/2025: Judgment concerning wealth tax assessment of a personal company
Summary of the Facts
The complainants, owners of a personal company, disputed the amount of wealth tax value set by the Zurich cantonal tax office for the 2019 tax period. The lower courts applied the modified practitioner method (equal weighting of income and asset values). The complainants demanded valuation based solely on asset value and filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_565/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint due to denial of justice
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a complaint against the Federal Administrative Court (BVGer) alleging “denial of justice.” He particularly criticized the non-transmission of submissions by FINMA and D.________ by the BVGer, although he repeatedly requested access to these files. He requested that the BVGer be ordered to provide him the files. The Federal Administrative Court had suspended proceedings related to a FINMA decision on the write-down of capital instruments of the systemically relevant bank B.________ AG.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_225/2025: Judgment on the initiation of neighborhood planning in the city of Maienfeld
Summary of the Facts
The city of Maienfeld decided to carry out neighborhood planning for Kaufhausplatz and Schlossbungert. The aim was to regulate the design and development of the area, especially the implementation of an underground public parking facility. Various objection proceedings against the neighborhood planning were unsuccessful; the Graubünden Cantonal Court also dismissed the complaints. The complainants subsequently appealed to the Federal Supreme Court, requesting to prohibit the initiation of the neighborhood planning.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_11/2025: Compensation of court-appointed defense counsel in criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The court-appointed defense counsel A.________ challenges the reduction of her compensation by the Schaffhausen Court of Appeal for the first and second appeal proceedings. The dispute concerns in particular the fee reductions, the calculation of workload, and the assessment of the complexity of the criminal proceedings.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_96/2026: Non-admission of a complaint related to tenancy law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a decision of the Lucerne Cantonal Court dated 12 January 2026. At the same time, she filed a request for legal aid. The Federal Supreme Court initially examined compliance with the appeal deadline.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_341/2025: Dismissal of the complaint in a fee matter
Summary of the Facts
The respondent, a law firm, represented the complainant (A.________) and two related companies in several proceedings. After termination of the mandate, it issued a final invoice of around CHF 202,000.–. After deducting payments already made of CHF 101,000.–, it sought the outstanding difference by partial lawsuit. The district court fully upheld the claim, and the Solothurn Cantonal Court confirmed this judgment.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_411/2025: Dismissal of a pension claim in the field of disability insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, born in 1967, repeatedly applied to the IV office Lucerne for benefits citing chronic pain and other complaints. Earlier applications for disability pension were rejected due to lack of impact on earning capacity. In the current situation, the complainant requested a court expert report to prove a suspected deterioration of his health. Based on a 2023 multidisciplinary report by ABI, the IV office maintained its view that no pension entitlement exists. The Cantonal Court of Lucerne confirmed this, leading the complainant to appeal to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_587/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint in voting rights matters concerning the federal popular vote on the E-ID Act
Summary of the Facts
Fritz Jordi filed a voting complaint regarding the federal popular vote of 28 September 2025 on the Federal Act on Electronic Identification (E-ID Act) and requested a repetition of the vote. The government of the Canton of St. Gallen did not admit the complaint as the statutory appeal period pursuant to Art. 77 para. 2 of the Federal Act on Political Rights (BPR) was missed. Jordi filed a voting rights complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_705/2025: Withdrawal of a complaint against the non-recognition of a German osteopathy training qualification
Summary of the Facts
A.________, the complainant, wanted her German osteopathy training qualification recognized by the Swiss Red Cross (SRK). After the SRK refused recognition and did not carry out a positive reconsideration, the complainant turned to the Federal Administrative Court, which dismissed her complaint on 31 October 2025. She then filed a public law complaint with the Federal Supreme Court. After the SRK stated in the proceedings that it would review any new reconsideration request in light of current case law, the complainant withdrew her complaint.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_839/2025: Challenge motion in proceedings concerning marital protective measures
Summary of the Facts
The wife A.A.________ requested the disqualification of three judges of the Geneva judiciary due to their political affiliation and alleged serious procedural errors, particularly in the context of a decision by these judges to admit the husband’s motion for reinstatement of the deadline. The Geneva judges’ delegation for challenges declared the challenge motion inadmissible. The wife appealed this decision to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_1067/2025: Decision concerning the allocation of the marital home and further protective measures for the marriage
Summary of the Facts
A foreign marriage was contracted in 2007, a child was born in 2015. After separation in 2021, the wife lived in part of the shared house (“the extension”), while the husband stayed with the child in the other part (“the chalet”). The allocation of the marital home within protective measures for the marital community was disputed over several instances.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_1305/2025: Conditional release from detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced in 2001 to 15 years imprisonment for intentional homicide and gang-related theft, combined with detention under former law (former Art. 43 CC). This was adapted to new law in 2009. A.________ filed an application for conditional release during detention, which was rejected in 2025 by the Zurich Office for Penal Enforcement and Reintegration. The Zurich Administrative Court did not admit the complaint against this, considering the formal grounds for the complaint as not fulfilled.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_535/2025: Discontinuation of proceedings against A.________ and cost allocation
Summary of the Facts
Proceedings were initiated against A.________ on suspicion of serious and simple bodily injury, coercion, and deprivation of liberty following an incident on 19 April 2024 with his wife. The Geneva public prosecutor discontinued the proceedings due to the absence of a required criminal complaint but imposed procedural costs of CHF 1,236.05 on A.________ and refused compensation. The appeal against the cost decision and refusal of compensation was dismissed by the cantonal appellate authority. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_124/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint due to non-payment of advance on costs
Summary of the Facts
On 20 December 2025, A.________ filed a complaint with the Vaud Cantonal Tribunal against a decision of the Vaud tax administration dated 19 November 2025 concerning federal direct tax as well as cantonal and municipal taxes for the 2023 tax period. The Cantonal Tribunal ordered an advance payment of CHF 1,000 with a deadline of 13 January 2026 and a warning of non-admission in case of default. Due to non-payment, the Cantonal Tribunal declared the complaint inadmissible on 22 January 2026. On 14 February 2026, A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court requesting annulment of this decision and remand for setting a new deadline for the advance payment.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_415/2025: Judgment on provisional legal opening regarding planning surplus charges
Summary of the Facts
The municipality of B.________ asserted two claims arising from contracts on planning surplus charges caused by rezoning of properties. The complainant, a member of the relevant simple partnership, raised legal objection. The municipality requested provisional legal opening, which was rejected by the Bern-Mittelland Regional Court. The Bern Cantonal Court partially upheld the complaint concerning legal opening. The Federal Supreme Court dealt with the question of due date of claims and provisional legal opening upon complaint of the opposing party.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_240/2025: Judgment concerning repetition of the bar exam for health reasons
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, took the written civil law exam on 19 February 2024 but missed the criminal law and notarial law exams due to illness. The Zug Bar Examination Committee classified his absence as unexcused and decided all written exams must be repeated. He was also charged for a medical expert examination. This led to an appeal to the Zug Cantonal Court, which dismissed the complaint. The complainant then applied to the Federal Supreme Court for annulment of the cantonal court’s judgment and admission to new exam attempts.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_54/2026: Judgment on complaint against a decision concerning definitive legal opening
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court against the decision of the Schwyz Cantonal Court, which dismissed her complaint against a non-admission order of the Höfe District Court. At the same time, she requested restoration of the appeal deadline due to illness-related incapacity and applied for legal aid.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4D_8/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainant challenged the judgment of the Zurich Court of Appeal, which dismissed the complaint against the definitive legal opening granted by the Dielsdorf District Court in favor of the city of Zurich. The disputed amount was CHF 3,322.– plus interest.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_864/2025: Dismissal of the complaint against educational guardianship
Summary of the Facts
The judgment concerns the establishment of an educational guardianship pursuant to Art. 308 para. 1 CC by the Child and Adult Protection Authority of the Bern Jura (APEA) for a minor endangered in her development due to psychological instability. The parents had not provided sufficient support. The minor and later also her parents appealed the APEA decision, which was dismissed by the lower court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_126/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint concerning building police and restoration of lawful condition
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, runs a pony riding operation with her parents on two agriculturally located properties in Frutigen. In 2021, the Frutigen municipality found various structures without building permits (including storage shed, pony stable, and shelter). By order dated 26 October 2023, restoration of the lawful condition was ordered. After unsuccessful challenge of the order before the Bern Building and Traffic Directorate and the Bern Administrative Court, the complainant appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_289/2025: Decision on the question of employability upon registration for unemployment insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (born 1962), who worked primarily self-employed for years, registered unemployed as of 26 June 2023. The cantonal Directorate for Labor and Labor Market (DGEM) found, however, that due to his long-standing dynamics of self-employment and lack of willingness to actually give it up, he was not employable. The lower court confirmed this decision.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_133/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint due to denial of justice
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint for denial of justice and unjustified delay with the Federal Supreme Court on 30 January 2026. He demanded that the Camera di protezione of the Tribunal of Appeal of the Canton of Ticino decide promptly on his request of 23 October 2025 concerning the protection of his son B.________ (born 2017). The contested measure originally stemmed from a super-provisional order of the regional protective authority dated 16 November 2023.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5D_1/2026: Judgment concerning legal aid in connection with a claim contesting new assets
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a claim under Art. 265a para. 4 SchKG contesting new assets and simultaneously requested legal aid. This request was rejected by the St. Gallen District Court. After unsuccessful further appeal to the St. Gallen Cantonal Court, he filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_9/2026: Judgment concerning value-added tax for the tax periods 2017–2020
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG, which operates a golf facility and offers services in golf tournaments, golf courses, and golf trips, was subjected to a VAT audit by the Federal Tax Administration (ESTV) for the tax periods 2017–2020. Differences between the commercial accounts and VAT returns led to a supplementary claim of CHF 103,858.–. Reasons included revenue discrepancies, private use shares, and input tax corrections. The taxpayer initially submitted documents that did not clarify the differences and subsequently challenged the claim before the Federal Administrative Court and the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.