Latest Judgments of the Federal Supreme Court
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Supreme Court (FSCS) 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 only. 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 areas of law.
5A_172/2026: Judgment on the dismissal of a debt collection request
Summary of the facts
The appellant filed a debt collection request against the Social Services of Wettingen on October 14, 2025, which was rejected by the Debt Collection Office of Wettingen. His appeals to the Baden District Court and the High Court of the Canton of Aargau were unsuccessful. On February 9, 2026, the High Court did not consider the appeal due to insufficient reasoning. The appellant then turned to the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the considerations
The issue in the proceedings is whether the High Court rightly did not consider the cantonal appeal. An appeal to the Federal Supreme Court must be sufficiently reasoned pursuant to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG. The appellant did not engage with the reasoning of the decision not to consider the appeal but only described the claim asserted against the Social Services. The appeal to the Federal Supreme Court contained no sufficient reasoning, which is why the presiding judge did not consider the appeal in the simplified procedure pursuant to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court did not consider the appeal and imposed the court costs on the appellant.
6B_1002/2025: Non-admission of an appeal in a criminal matter (extortion, attempted robbery-extortion)
Summary of the facts
The High Court of the Canton of Zurich convicted the appellant in the second instance for extortion and attempted robbery-extortion to 27 months imprisonment and refrained from ordering deportation. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, alleging, among other things, violation of his right to effective defense and procedural fairness.
Summary of the considerations
The judgment of the High Court of November 10, 2025, and the presidential orders of September 9, 2025, and January 28, 2025, form the object of challenge. The appellant was informed that communications by ordinary email are invalid in form. It was examined whether the appeal meets the reasoning requirements under Art. 42 para. 2 and Art. 106 para. 2 BGG. This is not the case, as the submissions are of an appellate nature and do not specifically engage with the considerations of the lower court. The complaints concerning insufficient official defense and lack of procedural fairness were also deemed insufficiently reasoned. Therefore, the appeal is not to be considered due to lack of suitable reasoning. The request for legal aid was rejected due to lack of prospects of success. Reduced court costs were set in view of the appellant's financial situation.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court did not consider the appeal and dismissed the request for legal aid. Furthermore, court costs of CHF 500 were imposed.
2C_399/2024: Assessment of short-term detention under Art. 73 AIG in relation to the Dublin III Regulation
Summary of the facts
A.________, an Afghan national, was arrested at Zurich Airport with a forged Afghan passport. After his release from criminal detention, the Zurich Migration Office ordered on the same day a short-term detention pursuant to Art. 73 para. 1 AIG to transfer him to the Thurgau Migration Office, which was responsible for the Dublin procedure and removal. The respondent requested judicial review of the short-term detention. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich declared the detention unlawful. The State Secretariat for Migration appealed this decision to the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the considerations
- E. 1: The appeal is admissible as it concerns a concrete legal question in the context of short-term detention under Art. 73 AIG and compatibility with the Dublin III Regulation. - E. 3: The lower court wrongly assumed that the provisions on Dublin detention (Art. 76a and Art. 80a AIG) also apply to domestic transfers to the competent cantonal migration authority. - E. 4: The Dublin III Regulation exclusively governs cross-border transfers; domestic transfers are not within its scope. The short-term detention under Art. 73 AIG was therefore generally applicable. - E. 5: There was no conclusive clarity as to whether a Dublin procedure would actually be applied. Therefore, the short-term detention order did not necessarily have to be made within the framework of the Dublin detention regulations. - E. 6: The lower court failed to examine whether the conditions for short-term detention under Art. 73 AIG were met. The administrative court is instructed to remedy this. - E. 7: The appeal of the State Secretariat is upheld; the matter is remanded to the lower court to clarify the legality of the detention.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was upheld, the decision of the administrative court was overturned, and the case was remanded for a new assessment. The request for legal aid was also granted, and no court costs were imposed.
6B_5/2026: Non-admission of an appeal concerning non-admission of an appeal
Summary of the facts
The appellant filed an appeal against a judgment of the Uster District Court but failed to submit a statement of appeal. For this reason, the Zurich High Court did not consider the appeal. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_1/2026: Decision on entitlement to social assistance benefits
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ has been receiving social assistance sporadically in the form of Revenu d'insertion (RI) since September 2022. In April 2024, it became known that she lives with her adult daughter. The social services then adjusted the amount of RI because the daughter is not considered a dependent person. After the cantonal authorities (CSR and DGCS) rejected her appeal, A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, arguing among other things that the daughter supports her as a close relative and therefore is not obliged to contribute to household costs.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_98/2026: Decision on bankruptcy opening and non-admission of an appeal due to non-payment of the cost advance
Summary of the facts
The Willisau District Court opened bankruptcy proceedings against A.________ AG in liquidation. The appellant filed an appeal against this decision to the Lucerne Cantonal Court, which was dismissed. She then turned to the Federal Supreme Court. She was repeatedly requested to pay a cost advance but did not comply.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
9C_11/2026: Non-admission of an appeal in the context of health insurance
Summary of the facts
The appellant filed an appeal against a decision of the Lucerne Cantonal Court, which had not considered an earlier appeal of the appellant because it was submitted late. Additionally, the appellant requested legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_238/2026: Non-admission of an appeal concerning forced medication
Summary of the facts
The appellant, who has been institutionalized for decades due to chronic paranoid schizophrenia, filed an appeal in 2026 against an alleged forced medication with the preparation "Xeplion". The lower courts did not consider the appeal because there was no formally ordered or factually existing forced treatment. The appeal to the Federal Supreme Court was directed against this decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
9C_279/2025: Jurisdiction of the arbitration tribunal under Art. 89 KVG
Summary of the facts
A.________ GmbH, employer of the mother caring for a minor obligatorily insured with Avenir, demands from Avenir Health Insurance AG compensation for the mother's care services for her son, based on an assignment declaration of the insured. The Cantonal Arbitration Tribunal did not consider the claim of A.________ GmbH.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1062/2025: Judgment on multiple embezzlement under Art. 138 Criminal Code and questions of the right to file a criminal complaint
Summary of the facts
A.A. was convicted again by the Lucerne Cantonal Court in a remand procedure for multiple embezzlement to the detriment of his deceased mother. The charges concerned asset outflows from the mother's accounts during her incapacity, enabled by a general power of attorney. Central was the question of whether and when an effective criminal complaint was filed by the legal guardians or the adult protection authority.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_377/2025: Recovery of direct payments due to violations of animal welfare regulations
Summary of the facts
The appellant managed a farm until the end of 2020, which was taken over by his son from 2021. After an inspection by the veterinary office and the control body in December 2020, animal welfare deficiencies were found (e.g., lack of weather protection, lame, dirty and lung-diseased animals). Due to violations of the ecological performance record (ÖLN), the agricultural office ordered recovery of direct payments amounting to CHF 120,370.15. The appellant claimed that the reductions and the procedure were flawed.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_241/2026: Non-admission of an appeal concerning cost advance in an inheritance division
Summary of the facts
In an inheritance division process before the Meilen District Court, A.________ (appellant) was ordered by decision of June 20, 2025, to pay a cost advance of CHF 78,000. A.________ filed an appeal, requesting the annulment of the decision, the setting of the dispute value at least CHF 73,614,702, and an obligation of B.________ to pay a higher cost advance. On February 5, 2026, the Zurich High Court did not consider the appeal due to lack of appeal. A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against this decision with similar requests.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_582/2025: Judgment on non-extension of a residence permit
Summary of the facts
The appellant, a Kosovar national, has lived in Switzerland since 2006 due to family reunification. After prolonged receipt of social assistance, considerable debts, and multiple criminal convictions, the Zurich Migration Office refused to extend his residence permit. The cantonal legal remedies were also unsuccessful. With an appeal in public law matters and a subsidiary constitutional complaint, the appellant requested the Federal Supreme Court to extend the residence permit.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_24/2024: Acceptance of the appeal regarding the division of pension assets
Summary of the facts
A.________ and B.________ were married from 2011. Throughout the proceedings, there was dispute over the division of claims to occupational pension benefits acquired during the marriage. The Civil Court of the Saane District and the I. Civil Appeals Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Fribourg rejected the division pursuant to Art. 124b para. 2 ZGB, as the marriage duration was considered very short and the separate living arrangement much longer. A.________ then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_998/2025: International jurisdiction for divorce
Summary of the facts
The parties, A.A.________ (Swiss national, resident in Singapore) and B.A.________ (Moldovan national, with stays including Ukraine and Moldova), separated their marital community in 2016. In 2018, the husband filed a unilateral divorce claim at the Tribunal d’arrondissement de Lausanne. After court proceedings and jurisdictional disputes regarding international jurisdiction due to the absence of residence of both parties in Switzerland, the cantonal court ultimately declared the husband's claim inadmissible. The husband appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_214/2026: Non-admission of an appeal against the order on suspensive effect
Summary of the facts
The appellant requested the removal of a bidding surcharge pursuant to Art. 143 SchKG but was already rejected by the Debt Collection Office Winterthur-Wülflingen. After rejection at the district level and the High Court of the Canton of Zurich’s order not to consider the suspensive effect, he turned to the Federal Supreme Court. The Federal Supreme Court rejected interim measures but did not examine the timely appeal on the merits.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_326/2025: Appeal against road construction plan in the Canton of Ticino
Summary of the facts
The Federal Supreme Court examined an appeal against a road construction plan in the Canton of Ticino, which provides for widening and raising a road section to 197.30 m above sea level to improve traffic safety and flood protection. A landowner disputed the public interest, proportionality, and environmental impacts of the project.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_244/2026: Deportation after forced sale of a property
Summary of the facts
In the context of a forced sale, the row house of the appellants was awarded to the respondents, who have since been registered as new owners in the land register. After the appellants did not vacate the property voluntarily, the respondents initiated an eviction procedure. The Winterthur District Court ordered the appellants to vacate. The appeal against this judgment was dismissed by the Zurich High Court. The appellants filed an appeal against this high court judgment with the Federal Supreme Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_51/2026: Driver's license suspension after single-vehicle accident on the A1 motorway
Summary of the facts
On March 31, 2023, A.________ caused a single-vehicle accident on the A1 motorway due to fatigue (secondary nodding off). In a final criminal order, he was convicted of driving in an unfit state and violating traffic rules. Based on this, the Road Traffic Office of the Canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden revoked his driver's license for three months. After unsuccessful appeal to the Department of the Interior and Security, the High Court of the Canton of Appenzell Ausserrhoden also dismissed the appeal. Before the Federal Supreme Court, A.________ requested annulment of the judgment or reduction of the suspension period.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_356/2025: Decision on exception permit in building and planning law
Summary of the facts
The municipality of Blonay-Saint-Légier plans the expansion and renovation of school buildings to meet increased demand for student places. An exception permit to exceed the maximum building height and approval of flat roofs were granted by the municipality, as well as a special permit to fell protected trees. A complaint by the owner of a neighboring property against these permits was dismissed by the Cantonal Tribunal of the Canton of Vaud (CDAP). The appellant then turned to the Federal Supreme Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_135/2026: Irreceivability of the appeal
Summary of the facts
The appellant had filed continuation requests in debt collection proceedings against debtor B.________, which were rejected by the Debt Collection Office. Against the decision of the Bern High Court, which did not consider the resulting appeal, the appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
9C_203/2025: Judgment on the assessment of cantonal and municipal taxes as well as direct federal tax
Summary of the facts
A.________ AG declared significantly lower taxable net profits for the tax years 2016 and 2017 compared to the decisions of the Cantonal Tax Office of St. Gallen. In the objection procedure, new annual financial statements were submitted, which were to show additional personnel costs in particular. The tax office rejected these as impermissible accounting changes. The lower courts, including most recently the Administrative Court of St. Gallen, upheld this assessment.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.