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, 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 legal fields.
7B_293/2026: Inadmissibility of a Late Opposition Against a Penal Order
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a late opposition against a penal order issued on 4 September 2025 by the public prosecutor of the Canton of Ticino concerning repeated secret recording of conversations. The president of the criminal chamber declared the opposition inadmissible by decision of 21 October 2025 due to the missed deadline. The cantonal appellate instance, the appeals chamber of the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Ticino, dismissed A.________'s appeal by judgment of 23 January 2026 on the grounds of admissibility.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examines ex officio whether an appeal is admissible. According to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG, the grounds of appeal must be clearly stated. This also applies to appellants without legal representation. A.________'s appeal does not meet these requirements. The lower court found that the objection period of ten days began on 7 September 2025 and ended on 16 September 2025. The opposition sent on 22 September 2025 was therefore late. In his appeal, A.________ did not substantively address the reasoning of the lower court and failed to sufficiently allege violations of procedural rights. The appeal is obviously inadmissible. A request for legal aid is rejected as the appeal had no prospects of success from the outset. The court costs of CHF 500 are imposed on the appellant.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was declared inadmissible, the request for legal aid was rejected, and the court costs were imposed on the appellant.
4A_64/2026: Judgment on Precautionary Measures and Legal Aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant requested the Federal Patent Court for super-provisional and precautionary measures as well as legal aid. The request specifically concerned the removal of Emotach recording devices from vehicles of Respondent 1 (B.________ AG) to secure evidence for technical clarification of patent infringements. The devices were to be disposed of after 31 December 2025. The Federal Patent Court rejected or did not deal with the requests, among other reasons due to lack of urgency and unpaid advance on costs. Subsequently, the appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court found that regarding the dismissal of the requests for super-provisional measures (29 December 2025) there was no subject of appeal, as decisions on super-provisional measures cannot be appealed according to case law. However, the non-admission of the requests for precautionary evidence (19 January 2026) constituted an appealable final decision. The Federal Supreme Court examined whether constitutional rights had been violated. It stated that the appellant’s allegation that access to the court was denied was unfounded. The alleged urgency was caused by the appellant’s own delay. Regarding the allegation of violation of the prohibition of arbitrariness (Art. 9 BV), it was also found to be unfounded. In particular, the Federal Supreme Court did not address the dismissal of the super-provisional measures as these were not subject to appeal. A violation of the right to legal aid (Art. 29 para. 3 BV) was not sufficiently substantiated. The Federal Patent Court had credibly demonstrated the futility of the proceedings, which justified the advance on costs. Overall, the appeal was obviously unfounded and did not meet the reasoning requirements.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, the request for legal aid was rejected, and the court costs were imposed on the appellant without party compensation.
7B_258/2026: Non-Admission of a Criminal Complaint; Non-Admissibility of an Appeal to the Federal Supreme Court
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a criminal complaint against the Swiss Radio and Television Corporation as well as other unspecified media. He accused them, among other things, of "systematic media destruction" of his private life and violations of his personality rights. The Lucerne public prosecutor did not take the matter up, and the Lucerne Cantonal Court did not admit the appeal against this decision. The appellant then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The Federal Supreme Court finds that the appellant’s submission does not meet the legal requirements for sufficient reasoning according to Art. 42 para. 2 and Art. 106 para. 2 BGG. In particular, there is no substantive engagement with the contested decision of the Lucerne Cantonal Court. - **E.2:** Due to the lack of reasoning, the appeal is not admitted in the simplified procedure under Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG. The appellant should have shown in what way the lower court made an arbitrary finding of facts or violated the law. - **E.3:** The request for legal aid is rejected as the appeal is without prospects of success (Art. 64 para. 1 BGG). The court costs are imposed on the appellant (Art. 66 para. 1 BGG).
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court did not admit the appeal, rejected the request for legal aid, and imposed the court costs on the appellant.
1F_4/2026: Revision of Federal Supreme Court Judgment in Simplified Procedure
Summary of the Facts
A.________ requested revision of the Federal Supreme Court judgment 1C_110/2026 of 10 March 2026, which did not admit his appeal in the simplified procedure under Art. 108 para. 1 BGG. The starting point was a decision of the indictment chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen of 4 February 2026, which refused authorization to open a criminal investigation.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_153/2026: Denial of Justice
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a medical faculty student at the University of Zurich, alleged a formal denial of justice by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich (respondent). She held that the Administrative Court committed a formal denial of justice in connection with a pending procedure before the appeals commission of the Zurich universities and her request for provisional access to third-year courses. The Administrative Court dismissed the appeal where it was admitted. The appellant brought the judgment to the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
8C_551/2025: Judgment on Reconsideration of an Invalidity Pension
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________, born in 1967, has received a half invalidity pension since 2012. After a renewed review by the IV office Glarus in 2023, it was found that he had worked in a 70% workload since the pension grant and that the degree of disability was only 32%. The IV office therefore revoked the half invalidity pension as of the end of March 2025. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Glarus dismissed the appeal against this decision. A.________ then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
4A_28/2026: Judgment Concerning Precautionary Measures and Legal Aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant requested the Federal Patent Court for super-provisional measures for the precautionary securing of recording devices of Respondent 1 based on Art. 158 para. 1 lit. b ZPO, Art. 77 PatG, and Art. 265 ZPO, to clarify the technical design of these devices for a patent law examination. At the same time, he applied for legal aid. The Federal Patent Court dismissed the request as the conditions for a credible assertion of a claim and the urgency of the application were not met. The request for legal aid was also rejected. The appellant filed a civil appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against this judgment.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
8C_605/2025: Judgment on Contribution Obligation in Accident Insurance for Dependent Piecework
Summary of the Facts
A.________ GmbH was insured with Suva for mandatory occupational and non-occupational accident insurance from 2018 to 2021. After a company audit, Suva found that payments of CHF 1,457,856.05 made to B.________ GmbH (in liquidation) were to be qualified as wage sums for dependent employment. Based on this, Suva demanded additional premiums of CHF 83,065.30. The objection decision was overturned by the Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau. Suva filed an appeal in public law matters with the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_112/2026: Non-Admissibility of an Appeal Against a Discontinuation Order
Summary of the Facts
The Regional Public Prosecutor's Office Bernese Jura-Seeland discontinued a criminal proceeding concerning an extraordinary death. The appellant (father of the deceased) requested further evidence collection, which the Bern Higher Court rejected. The appellant filed a criminal appeal requesting, among other things, the annulment of the Higher Court’s decision of 9 December 2025 and remittance of the case to the Public Prosecutor’s Office for further investigation.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_402/2025: Authorization to Prosecute for Abuse of Office
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was injured by a blow with a laptop and later filed a criminal complaint against the police officer B.________ for abuse of office. The respondent is alleged to have improperly forwarded photos and a medical report and acted with bias. The cantonal authorities referred the investigation for prosecution authorization to the Zurich Higher Court, which refused authorization. A.________ appealed.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_185/2026: Inadmissibility of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an appeal against a decision of the indictment chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen, which refused authorization to open criminal proceedings against two prosecutors. The appeal contains no concrete requests.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_107/2025: Liability of Public Corporations and Their Organs, Illegal Act and Good Faith
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SA (hereinafter: the company), active in the acquisition of real estate and construction of buildings, acquired a plot (RF 929) in the municipality of Torny (Canton of Fribourg) in 2018. This plot was designated as fully belonging to the building zone due to an erroneous certificate from the municipality, although it largely belonged to the agricultural zone. After a building application was negatively assessed, the company unsuccessfully tried to get compensation for the damage from the municipality. The lower courts dismissed the company’s compensation claims on the grounds that the protection of good faith could not apply since the company should have recognized the incorrectness of the information itself.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_622/2025: Order of a 30 km/h Zone on the Waterway
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns the permissible maximum speed on the waterway in Uttwil (TG), which is part of the international Lake Constance cycle path. Originally, a maximum speed of 50 km/h was signposted there. Following demands from residents, a traffic engineering report recommended reducing it to 30 km/h to improve traffic safety. The responsible civil engineering office approved this change, while the Administrative Court of the Canton of Thurgau revoked the 30 km/h order, which was then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
8C_418/2025: Judgment on the Refusal of Further Insurance Benefits by Suva After an Accident
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a man born in 1985, was insured with Suva against accident consequences. After a physical assault in 2022, he suffered, according to diagnoses, among other things, a traumatic brain injury. Suva provided medical treatment and daily allowances but stopped benefits as of December 2023, as it denied an adequate causal link between the complaints and the accident. The objection and the appellant’s appeal were subsequently dismissed.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_157/2026: Non-Admissibility of an Appeal (Non-Admission)
Summary of the Facts
The appellant challenged a decision of the Zurich Higher Court dated 12 January 2026. Subsequently, she missed timely payment of the required advance on costs despite reminders and the setting of a non-extendable deadline.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
8C_190/2026: Non-Admissibility of an Appeal Concerning Disability Insurance
Summary of the Facts
An insured person (A.________) filed an appeal against a decision of the Insurance Court of the Canton of St. Gallen of 10 February 2026. The lower court had confirmed the decision of the IV office of the Canton of St. Gallen, which found that there was no entitlement to an invalidity pension, basing its decision on a multidisciplinary expert report. The appellant argued that various procedural errors and a wrong assessment of his health condition had unjustly led to the denial of his pension claim.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2F_4/2026: Judgment on the Revision of a Non-Admissibility Decision
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG, B.________ GmbH, and C.________ S.A. filed a state liability claim in May 2023 with the Federal Department of Finance, which was rejected. The applicants then appealed to the Federal Administrative Court, after which the Federal Supreme Court issued decisions in cases 2C_330/2025 and 2F_30/2025. In the present matter, they filed a revision request against judgment 2F_30/2025 and requested, among other things, the approval of the declaratory claims filed in the original appeal procedure 2C_330/2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_415/2024: Judgment on the Appeal of A.________ GmbH Against the Discontinuation of a Criminal Proceeding
Summary of the Facts
A.________ GmbH rented a warehouse and set up a production facility for CBD hemp therein. After the collapse of an inadequately planned and constructed room ("grow box") which led to damage and a fire, the public prosecutor's office initiated investigations against, among others, the owner and an employee of A.________ GmbH and against B.________ involved in the construction. The proceedings against B.________ were discontinued multiple times after objections. A.________ GmbH filed an appeal and requested continuation of the criminal proceedings as well as obtaining a higher expert opinion.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_176/2024: Inadmissibility of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint together with his mother, D.________, for simple bodily injury after an altercation with B.________ in December 2022. The public prosecutor of the Canton of Neuchâtel did not admit the complaints. The cantonal appellate instance confirmed this decision. A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court to annul the cantonal decision and to open criminal proceedings against B.________.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_611/2025: Dismissal of the Appeal Due to Breach of Duties in the Public Employment Relationship
Summary of the Facts
The public employment relationships of A.________ with the Établissements B.________ were terminated due to various breaches of duty. The affected former employee was accused of unlawfully accessing sensitive personnel data of colleagues and repeatedly failing to fulfill her duties. Her request for reinstatement to her former position or for compensation was dismissed by the cantonal instances, which she brought before the Federal Supreme Court by appeal.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_553/2025: Authorization of Construction Works, Rent Control and Refund
Summary of the Facts
A foundation owning a residential building carried out extensive renovation works in 2014/2015. After completion of further works in 2020, it raised the rent significantly. The cantonal building authority classified the 2020 works as renovations subject to transformation and initiated corresponding measures (including rent control, refund of rent differences). The Geneva Administrative Court rejected this view, while the Administrative Court chamber corrected the decision again. The foundation disputed the classification of the 2020 works as subject to transformation before the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_103/2026: Non-Initiation of a Criminal Investigation
Summary of the Facts
The Limmattal/Albis Public Prosecutor's Office decided on 28 November 2025 not to initiate a criminal investigation against three cantonal officials for coercion. A.________ and B.________ filed appeals against this. The Zurich Higher Court required them to post a procedural bond of CHF 2,500 in total, threatening non-admission if the bond was not paid. The appellant turned to the Federal Supreme Court, particularly criticizing the amount of the bond.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_263/2024: Access to Information About Electronic Lottery Systems
Summary of the Facts
Loterie Romande operates electronic lottery systems and refuses a 2019 request from Radio Télévision Suisse (RTS) to disclose the locations of these lottery systems. The dispute concerns the applicability of the transparency provisions of federal legislation (LTrans) and the new intercantonal gambling concordat (CJA) on requested information. After several decisions by instances, Loterie Romande appealed to the Federal Supreme Court to overturn a negative decision in favour of RTS.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_592/2025: Deadline Compliance for Deliveries by A-Post Plus
Summary of the Facts
This case concerns the question whether a cantonal appeal deadline in connection with a building permit was correctly observed, although the contested decision was delivered by A-Post Plus on a Saturday. The appellants had exceeded the deadline and requested reinstatement.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_152/2026: Withdrawal of an Appeal in Connection with an Unsealing
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, represented by a lawyer, had filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court challenging a decision of the coercive measures court of the district of Dielsdorf dated 12 January 2026. The subject of the original decision was an unsealing. The appeal was then withdrawn by a submission of the appellant dated 16 March 2026.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2D_15/2025: Approval of the Appeal and Remand for Evidence Gathering
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SA, which operates a business in Châtel-St-Denis, and the Réseau B.________ had an agreement on the free delivery of medication upon medical order. After termination of this agreement by A.________ SA, disputes arose concerning the conduct of the Réseau B.________, which allegedly encouraged patients to use other pharmacies. The claim for CHF 20,000 for unfair conduct and defamation was rejected by Réseau B.________ and subsequently by the Fribourg Cantonal Court, but with a reduction of procedural costs for A.________ SA.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
4A_399/2024: Inadmissibility of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The facts concern a franchise agreement between appellant A.________ SA and respondents B.________ Sàrl, C.________, and D.________. The dispute concerned enforcement of non-compete clauses contained in the franchise agreement and associated measures. The cantonal lower court dismissed the appellant’s request for super-provisional and precautionary measures. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against this dismissal.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_171/2026: Inadmissibility of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The appellant challenged the decision of the Lucerne Cantonal Court, which dismissed her appeal against a decision of the Public Prosecutor's Office Division 3 Sursee, insofar as it was admitted. The appellant then filed a criminal appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_115/2026: Non-Admissibility and Non-Admittance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a criminal complaint against a third party for various allegations including defamation and coercion. The responsible public prosecutor decided not to take up the criminal case. The appellant filed an appeal against this decision, which the Aargau Higher Court did not admit due to insufficient reasoning. The appellant appealed this judgment to the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
9C_135/2025: Partial Approval of the Appeal Regarding Coverage of Care Costs
Summary of the Facts
An insured person, born in 1969, suffers from trisomy 21 combined with autistic behavior and severe anxiety disorder. He has received home care services since 2017, provided by B.________ Sàrl since April 2023. The health insurance Mutuel Assurance Maladie SA reduced the financial benefits for care hours in April 2023 as they did not meet legal requirements of effectiveness, appropriateness, and economic efficiency. After unsuccessful challenge of this decision at the Tribunal cantonal du canton de Vaud, the insured person appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7F_49/2025: Judgment Concerning a Revision Request
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ filed a revision request against a Federal Supreme Court judgment of 22 October 2025 (cases 7B_965/2025, 7B_966/2025, 7B_967/2025, 7B_968/2025) in which the Federal Supreme Court did not admit his appeals. He requested annulment of the judgment and a finding that formal complaints had been raised in the original appeals. He also requested legal aid for the revision proceedings.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_75/2026: Judgment Concerning Measures under the Domestic Violence Protection Act
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ was expelled from the family apartment by a decision of the Zurich Cantonal Police under the Domestic Violence Protection Act of the Canton of Zurich after an incident involving property damage and threats against his son B.A.________. He received distance and contact bans. The measures were limited until 8 December 2025. After confirmation by the Bülach District Court, A.A.________ appealed to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich, which dismissed the appeal and imposed costs on the appellant. A.A.________ filed an appeal in public law matters with the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_190/2026: Unsealing of Data Carriers in Criminal Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
A.________, against whom criminal proceedings for multiple frauds, attempted fraud, multiple document forgery, and complicity in fraud are ongoing, requested the sealing of his mobile phone and notebook. After multiple considerations of the unsealing by lower courts, the Solothurn detention court partially granted the unsealing. A.________ then filed another appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_630/2025: Non-Admissibility of a Voting Rights Complaint and Recusal Requests
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a voting rights complaint against a partial revision of the local planning in Thierachern and filed recusal requests against various decision-makers. The Directorate for Internal Affairs and Justice of the Canton of Bern did not admit the voting rights complaint and the recusal requests. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Bern Administrative Court, which did not admit the appeal due to non-payment of the required advance on costs despite deadline extension. The appellant appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_217/2026: Judgment on an Appeal Concerning Denial and Delay of Justice
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed an appeal for denial and delay of justice against the Regional Public Prosecutor’s Office Bern-Mittelland because it did not process his criminal complaint of 31 January 2025. After forwarding the criminal complaint to the Special Tasks Public Prosecutor, a non-admission decision followed. The lower court, the Bern Higher Court, dismissed the denial of justice appeal and related motions of the appellant.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_497/2025: Judgment on the Refusal of a Residence Permit
Summary of the Facts
The Russian citizen B.________ entered Switzerland in 2023 with a tourist visa, after which her Swiss daughter A.________ applied for a residence permit. The Migration Office refused this in 2024. The government council and the Basel-Landschaft Cantonal Court dismissed the corresponding appeals. Before the Federal Supreme Court, the appellants request annulment of the cantonal judgment and granting of the residence permit.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_429/2024: Judgment on a Building Permit Outside the Building Zone
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, owner of a building located outside the building zone in Elm, carried out extensive construction works without a building permit, despite prior refusal of an exception permit and an expressly ordered construction stop. After completion of the works, the responsible authority refused the building permit and ordered the dismantling of the unauthorized construction. Appeals against these decisions to the government council and the Administrative Court of the Canton of Glarus were dismissed.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_1072/2024: Inadmissibility of the Appeal Against Dismissal of a Criminal Complaint
Summary of the Facts
On 11 April 2024, A.________ filed a criminal complaint for breach of maintenance obligation against B.________ and declared himself as a private plaintiff. By decision of 15 April 2024, the Lausanne public prosecutor dismissed the complaint as late. On 23 April 2024, A.________, represented by his brother C.________, appealed this decision. On 7 June 2024, the president of the criminal appeals chamber of the Vaud Cantonal Court informed C.________ that, according to cantonal law, only admitted lawyers may represent parties and requested A.________ to sign the appeal himself. The appellant did not comply. By decision of 13 June 2024, the criminal appeals chamber declared the appeal inadmissible. A.________ appealed the decision of the criminal appeals chamber to the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
8C_457/2025: Approval of the Claim for a Maximum of 260 Daily Allowances from Unemployment Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The insured, born in 1960, worked at B.________ Sàrl since 1 June 2016. Due to an economically justified dismissal, his employment relationship ended on 31 December 2022. From 6 December 2022, he was completely incapacitated for work, and this incapacity lasted until 28 March 2024. On 27 March 2024, he registered with the unemployment insurance and applied for daily allowances. The fund granted him a maximum of 90 daily allowances due to an exemption from contribution obligation. Before the lower courts, the insured claimed entitlement to 260 daily allowances, as his employment relationship had been extended until 31 March 2023 due to the blocking period pursuant to Art. 336c OR.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_739/2025: Judgment on Legal Aid in Connection with a Study Exclusion
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a student at the Lucerne University of Applied Sciences, was excluded from studies after three failures in the module "Mathematics 1B." The legal remedies against the university’s decisions were unsuccessful, as was his request for legal aid in the cantonal court proceedings. The Lucerne Cantonal Court refused legal aid by interim order of 18 November 2025. A.________ appealed to the Federal Supreme Court and requested legal aid for both the main proceedings and before the Federal Supreme Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
4A_124/2026: Inadmissibility of the Appeal Concerning Daily Sickness Benefits Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against the judgment of the Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich of 19 December 2025. The cantonal court had ordered B.________ AG to pay daily sickness benefits of CHF 3,059.90 plus interest but dismissed the claim for the excess amount.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.