Latest Judgments of the Federal Supreme Court
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Supreme Court (FSC) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the further judgments, a summary of the facts is provided in each case. The full summaries of all judgments are available in the Lexplorer portal. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments individually tailored to your areas of law.
1C_208/2025: Decision on the refusal of a political debate format in a vocational school
Summary of the facts
A trainee at the Centre Professionnel du Nord-vaudois (CPNV) applied for the organization of a politically balanced debate with representatives of various parties before the federal elections 2023. The CPNV school management refused on the basis of a cantonal guideline of the Direction générale de l'enseignement obligatoire et de la pédagogie spécialisée (DGEO) and the Direction générale de l'enseignement postobligatoire (DGEP) dated 31 August 2023. This explicitly prohibits political debates in schools within the ten weeks before elections. The applicant’s subsequent complaints were dismissed by the Department for Vocational Education (DEF) and later by the Cour de droit administratif et public of the Tribunal cantonal of the Canton of Vaud (CDAP).
Summary of the considerations
The Federal Supreme Court concludes that the complainant is entitled to lodge a complaint in public-law matters, even though the 2023 elections have already taken place, since such situations can recur in comparable constellations and a fundamental question of public interest exists. The Court points out that the noted fact whether the complainant wanted to organize the debate himself or with support has no influence on the legal assessment. The guarantee of neutrality of public education (Art. 54 para. 2 Cst/VD) and the ban on political propaganda must not lead to disproportionate restrictions of the fundamental rights to freedom of expression and assembly (Art. 16 and 22 BV as well as Art. 10 and 11 ECHR). The debate planned by the complainant represents, in the Federal Supreme Court’s view, a normal school event and falls under the constitutional obligation for civic education according to Art. 85 Cst/VD. The isolated argument that debates could interfere with the election campaign and endanger neutrality (“vote-catching”) is insufficiently substantiated by the lower courts and does not withstand a proportionality test.
Summary of the dispositive
The complaint was upheld because the vocational school’s decision violates fundamental rights. The canton must pay compensation, and the matter is remanded to the cantonal instance for reassessment of procedural costs.
4F_1/2026: Request for revision
Summary of the facts
The applicant requested the revision of the Federal Supreme Court judgment of 29 December 2025 (4D_249/2025), in which his complaint was deemed abusive and was not admitted. He based his revision request on Art. 121 lit. c and lit. d BGG and raised various deficiencies. An application for legal aid for the revision procedure was also submitted.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1:** Review of previous judicial decisions and presentation of the rejection of the application for waiver of court costs and the subsequently dismissed complaint. - **E.2:** Reference to the well-known reasoning requirements for revision requests before the Federal Supreme Court established in numerous previous proceedings. - **E.3.1:** The applicant claims that various motions were disregarded in the previous procedure. The examination revealed that these claims are obviously unsupported and unfounded; moreover, no relevant evidentiary motions were submitted in time. - **E.3.2:** The application for legal aid was already finally rejected in the original Federal Supreme Court judgment. - **E.3.3:** There is no proof that significant facts were overlooked (Art. 121 lit. d BGG). - **E.3.4:** The applicant’s vexatious litigation conduct is again emphasized, as well as the incoherence of his motions and submissions. No exchange of briefs takes place. - **E.4:** The application for legal aid in the revision procedure is dismissed as the revision request appears hopeless from the outset. - **E.5:** Court costs are imposed on the applicant; no party compensation is awarded. - **E.6:** Notice that further submissions by the applicant in the same style will remain unanswered in the future and no further revision proceedings will be initiated.
Summary of the dispositive
The revision request was not admitted and the application for legal aid was rejected. Court costs amounting to CHF 1,000.-- were imposed on the applicant.
4A_233/2025: Dismissal of the complaint against judgment on commission claim and abusive termination
Summary of the facts
A.________ SA demands the annulment of a judgment of the lower court, according to which it owes its former employee B.________ a sales commission as well as compensation for abusive termination. B.________ had an "effective participation" in the sales process of condominium ownership units according to the employment contract. Furthermore, he was terminated after asserting claims for commission payments.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1:** The complaint is filed in accordance with Art. 72 ff. BGG, formally and timely as well as with sufficient cause, and is thus admissible. - **E.2:** The Federal Supreme Court explains that it generally interprets the facts pursuant to Art. 105 para. 1 BGG, unless the facts were obviously incorrectly or abusively recorded (Art. 105 para. 2 BGG), which is not the case here. - **E.3:** The allegation of violation of the right to be heard is dismissed for formal reasons due to insufficient reasoning. - **E.4:** The disputed clause on commission in the employment contract is interpreted considering Art. 18 CO and Art. 322b CO. A causal connection between B.________’s activity and the promotion of the sales of the real estate is established. Neither the contract content nor the law require that the contribution be substantial. - **E.5:** The termination was deemed abusive because there is a temporal connection between the assertion of the commission claim by the respondent and the termination. An economic reason for termination was rightly excluded by the lower court due to lack of concrete evidence. - **E.6:** The lower court gave a coherent justification that both the sales commission and the compensation for abusive termination are owed.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court dismisses the complaint and imposes the court costs on the appellant. No party compensation is awarded.
8C_758/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ lodged a complaint against a decision of the Caisse nationale suisse d'assurance en cas d'accidents (CNA) dated 19 March 2025. The Cour de justice of the République and Canton of Geneva, Social Insurance Chamber, dismissed the complaint by decision of 14 October 2025. A.________ subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court on 12 December 2025.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_41/2026: Non-admission of a complaint regarding tenant eviction
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a decision of the single judge in contract law of the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen concerning a tenant eviction. The Federal Supreme Court requested the complainant to pay an advance on costs, which he did not pay within the deadline. Instead, he submitted an inadequately reasoned and unsupported application for legal aid.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_303/2025: Judgment on sexual coercion and rape
Summary of the facts
A.A. was convicted by the lower court of sexual coercion, rape and threat, but acquitted of the charge of insult. The cantonal court recognized that A.A. repeatedly forced his wife B.A. to sexual acts in a context of dominance, threats and psychological pressure. The acts occurred during medically and psychologically vulnerable phases of the wife, namely after births and during a pregnancy. A.A. filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court to challenge the overturned penalty, denied committing the alleged acts and claimed arbitrary factual findings.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_248/2025: Judgment on the imposition of a fee for remedying defects in electrical low-voltage installations
Summary of the facts
The complainant is the owner of a property where defects in electrical installations were identified during an inspection in 2017. After multiple deadline extensions granted by the network operator, the Federal Inspectorate for Heavy Current Installations (ESTI) took over enforcement of the defect remediation in 2022. The complainant applied for a deadline extension because his mother (the usufructuary) lived in the property. After her death, the ESTI issued a fee-based order (CHF 732.--). The Federal Administrative Court partly did not admit the complaint and otherwise dismissed it.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_187/2026: Non-admission of a complaint concerning accident insurance
Summary of the facts
– The complainant filed a complaint against the cessation of daily allowances and coverage of medical treatment costs by Suva. – The Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed the complaint, insofar as it admitted it, because Suva had carried out further investigations and had indicated a substantive decision.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_35/2026: Judgment concerning disability insurance
Summary of the facts
A.________, born 1973, registered with disability insurance in 2019 due to a traffic accident in 2018. After several examinations, the IV office of the Canton of Zurich finally denied entitlement to a pension by decision of 3 March 2025, citing a derived degree of disability under 40%. The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed a complaint against this decision. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_159/2026: Judgment on complaint concerning interim decision on provisional measures
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a complaint against an order by the Veterinary Office of the Canton of Bern, which confiscated and placed A.________’s female dog under quarantine. The application for super-provisional measures was rejected by the Economic, Energy and Environmental Directorate of the Canton of Bern. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern confirmed this rejection insofar as it admitted it. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court without providing a factual justification.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_118/2026: Judgment concerning state liability and legal aid
Summary of the facts
The complainant (A.________) asserted claims for damages amounting to CHF 30,000 based on breaches of duty by the Küssnacht social welfare office, which allegedly caused a significant deterioration in her health. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz initiated state liability proceedings but rejected the complainant’s application for legal aid citing the hopelessness of the claim.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_1014/2025: Objection against a penal order and non-admission due to insufficient reasoning
Summary of the facts
The complainant lodged an objection against a penal order by the Frauenfeld public prosecutor’s office for property damage with significant damage and trespassing. Since he failed to appear at the main hearing without excuse, the District Court of Frauenfeld declared the objection withdrawn. The Thurgau Higher Court dismissed the complaint against this decision on 28 November 2025 due to obviously insufficient reasoning. The complainant then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_63/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the facts
The complainant, A.________, applied at the Cassa di compensazione imprenditori Basilea for a slight helplessness allowance of the AHV, which was rejected by decision of 24 April 2025. This rejection was confirmed by a decision on objection dated 24 July 2025. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Ticino dismissed the complaint against this decision by judgment of 15 December 2025. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_1166/2025: Judgment concerning ordering of substitute measures instead of pre-trial detention
Summary of the facts
A.________ is suspected by the Nidwalden public prosecutor’s office of various economic crimes. After pre-trial detention, this was replaced by several substitute measures, including a travel ban, an obligation to report to the police, and the confiscation of travel documents. The complainant challenged these measures before the Federal Supreme Court, in particular disputing their proportionality.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_532/2025: Judgment on complaint against an arbitration award in connection with legal expenses insurance
Summary of the facts
On 24 August 2021, a traffic accident occurred involving the plaintiff (A.________) and the driver of an e-bike (C.________). C.________ was seriously injured. In the criminal proceedings, the plaintiff was found guilty of negligent bodily injury. The plaintiff sought to appeal this conviction. His legal expenses insurance (B.________ SA) denied coverage, considering the success of the appeal hopeless. The plaintiff then went before an arbitration court, which dismissed his claim for a declaration of non-hopelessness. The Federal Supreme Court had to decide on the complaint against this arbitration award.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_606/2024: Decision on supplementary benefits for AHV/IV during imprisonment
Summary of the facts
A.________, recipient of a full disability pension since 1986 and supplementary benefits since 2003, was imprisoned in 2006. His pension was suspended according to Art. 21 para. 5 ATSG. The responsible compensation office rejected in 2022 a request from his guardian to reimburse medical costs incurred since 1 August 2021, as only recipients of a basic IV/compensation office benefit were entitled. The cantonal court overturned this decision and remanded the matter for reassessment to the compensation office. The compensation office appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_77/2025: Recognition of a foreign educational qualification in osteopathy
Summary of the facts
A.________, a Swiss resident, applied for recognition of her German master’s degree in osteopathy (M.Sc. D.________) as equivalent to the Swiss M.Sc. Osteopathy FH. The Swiss Red Cross (SRC) did not admit the application because the recognition requirements were not met. The Federal Administrative Court dismissed the application on the merits. Before the Federal Supreme Court, A.________ alleged, among other things, the lack of consideration of international agreements and argued that her qualification was at least partially equivalent.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_536/2025: Decision concerning unsealing of a seized envelope
Summary of the facts
The Cantonal Police of St. Gallen seized an envelope from A.________’s vehicle during a traffic stop on 28 February 2025, which was sealed at his request. The St. Gallen public prosecutor’s office requested unsealing of the envelope, which the Cantonal Coercive Measures Court approved on 13 May 2025. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court requesting annulment of the decision and dismissal of the prosecutor’s unsealing request.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_60/2026: Non-admission of criminal proceedings
Summary of the facts
A.________ and B.________ filed a criminal complaint on 14 January 2026 against the decision of the Aargau Higher Court of 25 November 2025, which confirmed the non-admission of criminal proceedings against C.________. The Federal Supreme Court’s procedure focuses exclusively on the lower court decision.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_510/2025: Refusal of supplementary benefits for a foreign person without legal residence in Switzerland
Summary of the facts
The Basel-Stadt Migration Office revoked the residence permit of the complainant (German citizen, born 1960) in 2020 and expelled him from Switzerland. These decisions were confirmed by earlier Federal Supreme Court rulings. The competent authority refused to grant supplementary benefits and allowances by decision of 9 September 2024, which was confirmed by an objection decision on 4 November 2024. The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Basel-Stadt dismissed the complaint against this decision on 15 April 2025.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4F_54/2025: Dismissal of a revision request
Summary of the facts
The Federal Supreme Court dealt with a revision request by the applicant concerning a previous judgment (4D_160/2025 of 15 October 2025). In that judgment, the Federal Supreme Court did not admit his complaint. The applicant requested revision citing alleged oversight of significant facts relating to his neediness and irreparable disadvantages. He also filed an application for legal aid.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_84/2025: Recognition of a foreign educational qualification in osteopathy
Summary of the facts
The complainant, a German citizen residing in Switzerland, applied to the Swiss Red Cross (SRC) for recognition of her German B.Sc. degree in osteopathy as equivalent to the Swiss master’s degree in osteopathy (FH). The SRC did not admit the application and alternatively refused recognition. The Federal Administrative Court dismissed the complaint, upheld the dismissal of the recognition application, and did not examine substantive equivalence in depth. The complainant demanded full recognition of her degree or remittance for examination by the lower instances before the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4F_3/2026: Non-admission of a revision request
Summary of the facts
The applicant filed a revision request against the Federal Supreme Court judgment of 30 December 2025 (4D_250/2025). He also requested the waiver of court costs in the previous proceedings. The judgment 4D_250/2025 concerned a vexatious and abusive complaint by the applicant.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4A_631/2025: Protection of the company name "Spassion"
Summary of the facts
Spassion SA and the sole proprietorship Christophe Legat – Piscines Spas’Sion disputed the protection of the company name "Spassion". Both companies offer, among other things, spas for sale and operate in Valais. Spassion SA claimed that the company name of Christophe Legat creates a risk of confusion with its own brand "Spassion". The lower court prohibited Christophe Legat from using the name "Spas’Sion" due to the risk of confusion.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
4D_10/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a judgment of the Zurich Higher Court dated 4 December 2025. The Federal Supreme Court requested him on 20 January 2026 to pay an advance on costs of CHF 500.– by 4 February 2026. The advance was neither paid within the deadline nor within the extended deadline granted on 12 February 2026 until 27 February 2026, leading to a threat of non-admission. Furthermore, the reasoning requirements according to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG are not met.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_617/2025: Dismissal of the attachment on assets of a foreign state due to lack of connection to Switzerland
Summary of the facts
A.________ (an international association) applied to B.________, a state, for attachment of assets in Switzerland in order to enforce outstanding claims from several loan agreements. The loans were based on foreign legal systems (including English law) and did not include an explicit connection to Switzerland. The attachment was initially ordered, but the lower courts (first-instance court and the Geneva Cantonal Court) revoked it due to insufficient connection to Switzerland.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_148/2026: Inadmissibility of the complaint due to lack of reasoning
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ had filed a complaint at the Zurich Higher Court against a non-admission order of the Winterthur/Unterland public prosecutor’s office dated 2 July 2025. This court dismissed the complaint on 14 January 2026 insofar as it admitted it. The complainant then filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Supreme Court on 4 February 2026.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_208/2026: Non-admission of a complaint due to lack of reasoning
Summary of the facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against the judgment of the Zurich Higher Court dated 5 March 2026. At the time of filing, only the dispositive part of the challenged judgment was available, without a full reasoning.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_481/2025: Preferential treatment of a creditor
Summary of the facts
The District Court of Bülach acquitted A.A.________ and B.A.________ in 2022 of various allegations, including preferential treatment of a creditor. On appeal, the Zurich Higher Court convicted both persons in 2025 of violating Art. 167 of the Criminal Code and sentenced them to conditional fines (90 daily rates of CHF 80.–). A.A.________ and B.A.________ requested the Federal Supreme Court to acquit them of the allegation of preferential treatment of a creditor.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_487/2024: Inadmissibility of the complaint
Summary of the facts
The parties had a previous personal and professional relationship, during which, according to the complainant, sexual assaults and psychological violence occurred by the respondent B.________. The complainant had previously filed several reports, resulting in a non-admission order by the public prosecutor. She pursued the matter up to the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the full summary of the judgment in the Portal.