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 rulings. For the further judgments, you will find a summary of the facts. The full 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.
7B_1338/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning deadline compliance and detention enforcement
Summary of the facts
A.________, in detention enforcement at the U.________ correctional facility, was disciplinarily fined because he did not comply with the conditions for an approved coffee machine and its accessories (milk frother). An appeal against this was dismissed by the Security Directorate of the Canton of Bern due to a formal deadline miss. A further appeal to the Bern Cantonal Court also resulted in non-admission because the submission by A.________’s legal representative was not filed in accordance with formal requirements. The dispute was finally brought before the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the considerations
- Consideration 1 (C.1): The Federal Supreme Court examines the formal requirements of the decision and a possible access to appeal in criminal matters under Art. 78 para. 2 lit. b BGG. It affirms the review by way of appeal. - Consideration 2 (C.2): The court analyzes the procedure of the lower court and confirms that deadlines according to cantonal law must be observed, including formal requirements (paper form only with legally sufficient signature). Electronic submissions without legal basis do not preserve the deadline. - 2.1: The practice of the Cantonal Court is presented, according to which submissions without a handwritten signature require a grace period for correction, provided there is no abuse of rights. - 2.2 and 2.4: The legal representative of the appellant repeatedly violated the formal requirements, so the setting of a grace period could be waived. The behavior of the legal representative was deemed abusive. - 2.5: The substantive assessment of the facts is unnecessary since the appeal was already dismissed for formal reasons. - Consideration 3 (C.3): The request for legal aid is dismissed for lack of prospects of success. Court costs are imposed on the appellant.
Summary of the ruling
The appeal is dismissed and the request for legal aid is rejected. Court costs are imposed on the appellant.
9F_29/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning a request for revision for cost coverage for therapy
Summary of the facts
A.________, who suffers from spinal muscular atrophy (SMA Type II), is compulsorily insured for health care with Visana AG. The insured requested coverage of costs for therapy with the drug Spinraza®, which was rejected by Visana because the therapeutic benefit was not considered sufficiently proven. After several legal proceedings, she now requested the revision of a previous Federal Supreme Court judgment (9C_318/2020, 9C_606/2021) dated 16 August 2022, citing a new study (Wurster et al., 2025) that supposedly demonstrates the therapeutic benefit of Spinraza® for adult SMA patients.
Summary of the considerations
- C.1: Revision of a Federal Supreme Court judgment is generally only possible under the statutory conditions (Art. 121 ff. BGG). A new review of the dispute is only admissible if the facts or evidence claimed were not known or available in the previous proceedings despite due diligence.
- C.2: The revision request meets formal requirements and was submitted within the deadline.
- C.4: The submitted study (Wurster et al.) is a genuine novelty as evidence since it was published after the original Federal Supreme Court judgment (16 August 2022). According to Art. 123 para. 2 lit. a BGG and relevant case law, facts or evidence arising only after the judgment cannot form the basis for revision. Under these circumstances, the revision request must be dismissed.
- C.4.3: The applicant is free to request Visana again for cost coverage for the therapy with reference to this study.
Summary of the ruling
The revision request is dismissed, and costs are imposed on the applicant.
4A_3/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning reinstatement of the deadline and legal aid
Summary of the facts
The appellant requested the Federal Supreme Court to overturn the decision of the Cantonal Court of Aargau and to revert the proceedings to the status of her submission of 12 June 2025. She particularly alleged a violation of the right to be heard and insufficient examination of her request for reinstatement of the deadline, legal aid, and installment or deferral reliefs. The Cantonal Court did not admit the appeal because the advance payment of costs was not paid within the set deadline.
Summary of the considerations
- C.1: The Federal Supreme Court reviews the admissibility of the appeal ex officio. As far as the appellant makes declaratory requests concerning alleged rights violations, these are not admitted. The substantive prerequisites are given, subject to sufficient reasoning of the complaints. - C.2: The appeal is only admissible if violations of law are sufficiently substantiated. Higher requirements apply to constitutional and cantonal or inter-cantonal legal violations. The appellant’s factual complaints do not meet these requirements. - C.3: The complaints regarding violation of the right to be heard and the handling of the reinstatement request are unfounded. The lower court examined the request and partially extended deadlines. The non-admission is due to the untimely payment of the advance payment of costs. - C.3.2: The application of the service fiction under Art. 138 para. 3 CPC by the lower court was correct; the appellant could expect service. - C.4: The requested legal aid is not to be granted according to the considerations.
Summary of the ruling
The appeal was dismissed, as was the request for legal aid. Court costs were imposed on the appellant and no party compensation was awarded.
7B_308/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning postponement of imprisonment execution
Summary of the facts
The appellant was sentenced by a final judgment of the Cour pénale II of the Cantonal Court of Valais dated 29 April 2024 to a 28-month custodial sentence for serious violations of the Narcotics Act. His request to postpone imprisonment for health and family reasons was denied by the competent authorities and cantonal courts. He appealed this judgment to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_480/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning disability pension
Summary of the facts
A.________ applied to the disability insurance on 29 December 2017 due to 100% incapacity to work caused by persistent hip complaints. After several medical assessments and a stroke, the disability insurance office granted him a half disability pension retroactively from 1 August 2021 to 31 July 2023. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau extended this period until 31 October 2023. By appeal to the Federal Supreme Court, A.________ requested a further extension beyond this date.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_189/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning insufficient information
Summary of the facts
The court text is not available, therefore neither facts, considerations nor ruling can be presented.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_213/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning social assistance
Summary of the facts
The appellant (A.________) appealed against non-admission of his appeal against a decision of the Social Authority of the City of Zurich. The Social Authority had rejected the appellant’s request for reassessment of a previous decision concerning benefit cuts. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich confirmed that the appeal deadline had already expired due to a service fiction before the appellant filed his appeal.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1340/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning order of the public prosecutor
Summary of the facts
A.________ appealed to the Federal Supreme Court against a decision of the lower court, which declared his appeal against the order of the public prosecutor of the Canton of Geneva dated 14.10.2025 inadmissible and struck the case after the order was lifted. A.________ requested the Federal Supreme Court to find violations of rights (in particular rights under the Federal Constitution and ECHR), to annul the original order, and if applicable, to delete DNA data and destroy samples.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1337/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning free access to personal effects storage
Summary of the facts
A.________, a detainee in the U.________ correctional facility, requested free access to his effects storage and free shipping of surplus clothes and effects, which was denied. After both the Security Directorate of the Canton of Bern and the Cantonal Court of Bern did not admit the related appeals due to deadline and formal deficiencies, he brought the matter to the Federal Supreme Court and requested annulment of the lower court decisions.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_52/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning supplementary benefits
Summary of the facts
The appellant, an Iranian national who has lived in Switzerland since December 2016, applied for supplementary benefits on 14 October 2024. The application was rejected by the Service des prestations complémentaires (SPC) of the Canton of Geneva because the appellant did not meet the minimum residence duration for lawful residence. The lower court confirmed this decision because the appellant was only tolerated before 19 January 2023 and did not have lawful residence within the meaning of Art. 5 para. 1 LPC.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_102/2025: Dismissal of the appeal concerning custody and maintenance after divorce
Summary of the facts
The Federal Supreme Court had to decide on the consequences of the divorce between the divorced spouses A.A.________ (appellant) and B.A.________ (respondent). The disputed issues were the allocation of custody over the children and the amount of maintenance contributions owed by the appellant. The District Court March placed the children under the custody of the mother and granted the father extended visitation rights. The Cantonal Court of Schwyz made changes to the maintenance arrangements but maintained the sole custody of the mother. The appellant sought alternating custody and an adjustment of maintenance payments before the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_157/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning declaration of enforceability of a Payment Order from Dubai
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ LLC requested the declaration of enforceability of a so-called Payment Order from Dubai (United Arab Emirates), which confirmed a claim of AED 140,000,000.-- plus further claims. Service of the Payment Order on the respondent B.________ was made by publication in newspapers due to lack of known address. The respondent only became aware of it through the exequatur request and filed a late legal remedy. The lower court dismissed the exequatur request because the Payment Order is not a recognisable decision within the meaning of Art. 25 PILA.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_170/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning residence permit
Summary of the facts
A Kosovan national who has been living in Switzerland since 2007 applied in 2017 for a residence permit on grounds of hardship. Due to his criminal convictions and lack of extraordinary integration, the competent authorities refused to forward the file for a positive opinion to the State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) and ordered his expulsion. After dismissal by two cantonal instances, he appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_501/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning disability pension in disability insurance
Summary of the facts
The appellant applied for benefits from the disability insurance after an injury to her right hand in 2017. After medical and occupational assessments, the IV office of the Canton of Aargau granted her a disability pension as of 1 January 2024 at a degree of disability of 40%, amounting to 25% of a full pension. A pension claim for the period before 1 January 2024 was denied, which led the appellant to file an appeal.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_951/2024: Non-admission of the appeal concerning custodial sentence and sanctions
Summary of the facts
The proceedings concern the appellant A.________, who was originally sentenced by the Regional Court Berner Jura-Seeland to a custodial sentence and further sanctions. The Cantonal Court of Bern largely confirmed the first instance convictions with minor modifications and reduced the custodial sentence to 40 months. The appellant then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_212/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning social assistance benefits
Summary of the facts
The judgment concerns an appeal by two persons (A.________ and B.________) against the cessation of social assistance benefits by the municipal council of Reinach from 1 February 2025. The lower court (Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau) found that the cessation was lawful, particularly because the debt enforcement subsistence minimum was above the level of social assistance.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1F_3/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning revision of the Federal Supreme Court judgment 1C_549/2025
Summary of the facts
The applicant A.________ requested revision of the Federal Supreme Court judgment 1C_549/2025 of 6 January 2026. In that judgment, the Federal Supreme Court dismissed an appeal related to the renewal elections of the St. Gallen city parliament, insofar as it admitted it. A.________ claimed that the method used for allocating mandates violated democratic rights and requested a fundamental decision on proportional representation.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_451/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning residence permit
Summary of the facts
The Iraqi national A.A. filed an application to extend or reissue his residence permit in Switzerland. He was convicted in Germany for drug offenses and after his deportation to Switzerland was rejected by the competent Swiss authorities. A.A.’s residence permit and those of his Brazilian wife and children expired in 2022. The lower courts saw neither legal basis nor proportionality for an extension. The family appealed to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich and finally to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_557/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning vehicle collision on a racetrack
Summary of the facts
The appellant was involved with his vehicle in a "track day" on a racetrack in Italy. There was an accident between his vehicle and another participant’s vehicle. The appellant sued for damages against the liability insurer of the other vehicle (the respondent), with the main issue being liability and the application of Italian civil law (Art. 2054 para. 2 CC).
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_211/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning accident insurance
Summary of the facts
An appellant challenged the decision of the Swiss National Accident Insurance Fund (Suva). The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich did not admit the appeal because the appellant did not submit the missing handwritten signature within the deadline despite reminders.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_107/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning order for legal enforcement
Summary of the facts
The appellant, A.________ AG, appealed to the Federal Supreme Court against the judgment of the Cantonal Court of Zug of 23 February 2026. The Cantonal Court had previously dismissed her appeal against a legal enforcement decision. A.________ AG also requested suspensive effect before the Federal Supreme Court, which was twice denied.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_109/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning legal enforcement decision
Summary of the facts
The Cantonal Court of Zug dismissed the appellant's (A.________ AG) appeal against the legal enforcement decision of the single judge at the Cantonal Court Zug. The appellant then lodged an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court and requested suspensive effect, which the Federal Supreme Court rejected by two presidential orders.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1139/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning deadline compliance in detention enforcement
Summary of the facts
The appellant, who is in detention enforcement at the U.________ correctional facility, requested to be allowed to wear his private wristwatch. This request was denied by the Security Directorate of the Canton of Bern. The Cantonal Court of Bern did not admit the appeal because the appeal deadline was not met due to non-compliant filing. The appellant now appeals to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5D_11/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning compensation of the court-appointed defense counsel in divorce proceedings
Summary of the facts
The Cantonal Court of Zurich determined on 6 March 2026 the compensation for the court-appointed defense counsel of the appellant in the appeal proceedings concerning a divorce judgment. In his submission to the Federal Supreme Court of 8 April 2026, the appellant claimed that his lawyer was a criminal offender for pedophilia and therefore had no right to compensation.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
9C_30/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning fee exemption
Summary of the facts
A.________ received an invoice from Serafe AG for the radio and television fee for the period 01.01.2019 to 30.11.2019. He requested exemption from the fee on the grounds that he received social assistance benefits. Serafe AG rejected the exemption request because the statutory requirements were not met and determined that A.________ is liable to pay the fee. The Federal Office of Communications (BAKOM) dismissed the appeal against the rejection, and the Federal Administrative Court confirmed this decision.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_103/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning disability pension
Summary of the facts
The appellant, A.________, born in 1988, suffered a frontobasal fracture with sequelae after an accident in 2021. After medical assessments and various integration measures, the IV office of the Canton of Zurich denied the claim to a disability pension by decision of 7 February 2025. The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the appeal against this decision on 18 December 2025, whereupon A.________ appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_27/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning party compensation
Summary of the facts
A.________ AG and B.________ SE (appellants) filed an appeal against a judgment of the ad-hoc arbitration tribunal based in Lucerne dated 2 December 2025. After initiation of proceedings before the Federal Supreme Court, they withdrew the appeal on 16 February 2026. The dispute concerned the assessment of party compensation for the Federal Supreme Court proceedings. The respondents (C.________ AG and D.________ S.A.) requested compensation of CHF 20,000.--, while the appellants argued that a maximum of CHF 5,000.-- would be appropriate.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_308/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning bankruptcy proceedings of a sole proprietorship
Summary of the facts
The appellant, registered as owner of a sole proprietorship in the commercial register, was confronted with a first instance bankruptcy ruling of the District Court Münchwilen dated 21 January 2026 due to outstanding tax debts. The Cantonal Court of Thurgau overturned this bankruptcy ruling on 19 February 2026 after the appellant proved her solvency. However, the cost imposition from the first instance was confirmed. The appellant contested this cost issue and other formalities before the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_787/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning unsealing of seized data on electronic devices
Summary of the facts
The Federal Criminal Court (MPC) conducted criminal proceedings against A.________ for qualified violation of the Narcotics Act (LStup). During a search, electronic devices were seized and their data initially copied forensically. A.________ requested sealing of the devices. The investigating judge requested unsealing, which was partially rejected. The MPC appealed this rejection to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.