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 with facts, considerations, and dispositives. 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.
2C_286/2025: Approval of the appeal concerning the licensing requirement for staff rooms in property acquisition by a foreign person
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SA, a company registered in the commercial register, acquired a property with a hotel that includes guest beds as well as staff rooms. The Interlaken-Oberhasli government governor's office and the Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern determined that this acquisition, including the staff rooms, was not subject to a licensing requirement under the Federal Act on the Acquisition of Real Estate by Persons Abroad (BewG). The Federal Office of Justice appealed this decision to the Federal Supreme Court, arguing that the affected staff rooms were subject to the licensing requirement.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examines the conditions for admissibility and finds the appeal admissible. It confirms the ex officio application of the law but only deviates from the factual findings of the lower court under restrictive conditions. The BewG limits the acquisition of real estate by foreign persons to prevent excessive foreign influence. Certain acquisition facts can be exempt from licensing, but this requires strict conditions. The staff rooms cannot be considered part of a business premises according to Art. 2 para. 2 lit. a BewG. The dispute concerns the question of operational necessity, which A.________ SA did not sufficiently demonstrate in the proceedings. Case law sets high requirements for the functional connection between the business premises and the staff apartments. The joint acquisition must be indispensable for the operation and closely linked both spatially and functionally. The court does not consider alternatives such as providing a shuttle service or renting staff locally as feasible. However, the scope of the co-acquired living space (22 beds) was not sufficiently specified by the lower court. Furthermore, A.________ SA violated its duty to cooperate in providing detailed explanations of the operational necessity. The Federal Supreme Court overturns the judgment of the lower court. The respondent 1 may submit a new application and provide a detailed explanation of the operational necessity of the acquisition.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court upheld the appeal and annulled the judgment of the Administrative Court. The case was remanded to the Administrative Court for a new decision on the cost and compensation consequences. Respondent 1 bears the court costs.
6B_780/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning negligent bodily injury in a traffic accident
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ was accused of noticing a traffic barrier on the A3 motorway too late due to lack of attention and subsequently causing a collision with the private plaintiff B.________'s vehicle by changing lanes. The private plaintiff suffered injuries leading to several weeks of work incapacity. The lower courts convicted the appellant of negligent bodily injury under Art. 125 para. 1 SCC.
Summary of the Considerations
- E.1.1: The appellant complains about the subsumption of his conduct under the offense of negligent bodily injury, particularly the examination of the breach of duty of care and the hypothetical causal course. - E.1.2: The lower court finds a breach of duty of care, especially regarding the adjustment of attention and control glance when changing lanes. It classifies the appellant's behavior as negligent since the accident would have been avoidable with due care. - E.1.3: The Federal Supreme Court confirms the application of the provisions of Art. 125 para. 1 SCC, Art. 31 para. 1 SVG, and other regulations. It refers to the foreseeability and avoidability of the offense consequences. - E.1.4.1: The appellant's complaints about insufficient factual findings and legal application are rejected because the lower court made the necessary findings and legal subsumption correctly. - E.1.4.2: The considerations on the avoidability of the offense are assessed by the Federal Supreme Court as coherent and comprehensible.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was dismissed and court costs were imposed on the appellant.
6B_838/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning simple bodily injury and deprivation of liberty
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ was convicted by the Tribunal criminel des Littoral et du Val-de-Travers on June 10, 2024, among other things, for simple bodily injury and deprivation of liberty to a custodial sentence of nine months, conditional on three years, as well as a fine of CHF 1,000. B.________ was convicted in the same matter to a monetary penalty for simple bodily injury. The Cantonal Court of Neuchâtel confirmed these judgments on August 28, 2025. A.________ lodged an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, requesting his acquittal and the conviction of B.________ for defamation among other things, as well as the review of cost and compensation issues.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examined A.________'s appeal regarding his position as a private plaintiff and found it inadmissible because A.________ did not assert any civil claims and no formal denial of justice was evident. Regarding his role as accused, the Federal Supreme Court examined A.________'s allegations, including arbitrary findings of fact and violation of the principle "in dubio pro reo," and found that the lower court had evaluated the evidence and facts thoroughly and correctly. The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal based on the established facts. It held, among other things, that the lower court rightly excluded the application of self-defense (Art. 15 SCC) and correctly qualified deprivation of liberty (Art. 183 SCC) and assaults (Art. 126 SCC). In particular, regarding the deprivation of liberty on June 8, 2022, the Federal Supreme Court found that the appellant acted unlawfully by preventing the injured party from leaving the residence.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, the application for legal aid was also rejected, and the court costs were imposed on the appellant.
4A_56/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning immediate termination
Summary of the Facts
The employee (B.________) was employed by A.________ AG from March 2021. After her ordinary termination as of December 31, 2022, the employer issued an immediate termination on November 24, 2022. The Cantonal Court of Zug declared the immediate termination unjustified and awarded the employee wage claims and compensation of five months' salary. The Zug Higher Court dismissed the employer's appeal.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_41/2024: Non-admission of the appeal concerning anti-competitive agreements in construction
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Supreme Court dealt with the appeal of A.________ SA in connection with a decision by the Competition Commission (WEKO) regarding unlawful anti-competitive agreements in the "2nd Offense Complex Preliminary Meetings (1997 - 2008)." The subject was the allegation that construction companies systematically coordinated awardees and bid prices for construction projects in the Lower Engadin during preliminary meetings. The question was especially whether the behavior of the predecessor and successor companies (B.B.________ and B.________ AG) occurred until May 2008, whether the anti-competitive agreement was unlawful, and whether the sanction imposed on them was lawful.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4F_39/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning revision of a Federal Supreme Court judgment
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a revision against a Federal Supreme Court judgment dated August 4, 2025, which among other things determined that the appeal did not meet the requirements of material exhaustion and sufficient reasoning under the Federal Act on the Federal Supreme Court (BGG). The appellant based his revision request on an alleged disregard of a relevant fact apparent from the files.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_70/2024: Non-admission of the appeal concerning unlawful anti-competitive agreements in structural and civil engineering
Summary of the Facts
G.________ AG was the subject of a competition investigation (No. 22-0458 "Structural and Civil Engineering Services Engadin I"), concerning possible unlawful anti-competitive agreements in the Lower Engadin between 1997 and 2012. Included in the analysis were G.________ AG's cooperation with the D.________ group and earlier preliminary meetings among construction companies. It was examined whether G.________ AG and other companies violated the Cartel Act (Art. 4 and 5 CA). Sanctions were imposed by the Competition Commission (WEKO) and the Federal Administrative Court against G.________ AG, which G.________ AG challenged before the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6B_877/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning sexual acts and Narcotics Act
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, was convicted by the cantonal court of the Canton of Jura, among other things, for sexual acts on a person incapable of judgment or resistance and violations of the Narcotics Act (LStup) and the Foreign Nationals and Integration Act (AIG) to a custodial sentence of 28 months. The court also ordered his expulsion for 15 years, a lifelong professional and activity ban in certain areas, and damages payment to the injured party. A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_601/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning contractual qualification of a Consulting Agreement
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG and the respondent, B.________, concluded an initial contract which provided for a review of cooperation and later a "Consulting Agreement" regulating the respondent's activity as an investment manager. After a termination without notice, B.________ continued her activity but received no further payments. She sued for disclosure of the monthly salaries owed to her until the end of the notice period according to the employment contract.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_277/2025: Approval of the appeal concerning unemployment benefits
Summary of the Facts
A former CFO (A.________) of a holding company in liquidation (B.________ Holding SA) applied for unemployment benefits from February 2021. The cantonal unemployment insurance fund refused compensation because A.________ was classified as a person with employer characteristics. This was confirmed by the cantonal authority, after which A.________ filed an appeal requesting a change of the decision.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_288/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning legal aid and representation
Summary of the Facts
A.A.________ and B.A.________ filed a criminal complaint against C.________ on August 26, 2025, for tax fraud, fraud, and forgery. The Cantonal Prosecutor's Office decided on February 3, 2026, not to take the criminal case. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed the complainants' request for legal aid and representation in connection with a non-prosecution order on February 27, 2026, and set a security of CHF 1,000. The complainants filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against this decision.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_283/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning insurance coverage in daily sickness allowance insurance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant was collectively insured for daily sickness allowance and compulsory accident insurance with his employer. After an accident in October 2022, daily allowance payments were made by the accident insurance. After termination of the employment relationship on July 31, 2023, the accident insurance stated that the health complaints were no longer accident-related as of the end of November 2022 at the latest. Nevertheless, benefits were continued as a courtesy until July 31, 2023. The appellant then asserted daily sickness allowance claims from the collective daily sickness allowance insurance, which were rejected.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6B_348/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning fraud
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was convicted by the District Court of La Côte on February 26, 2024, for commercial fraud and sentenced to six months' imprisonment. Appeals by the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Vaud and the AVS compensation office led to an increase of the custodial sentence to 24 months by the Criminal Court of Appeal of the Cantonal Court of Vaud on December 5, 2024. A.________'s appeal was dismissed. He then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, demanding acquittal or dismissal of the proceedings and a claim for compensation against the Canton of Vaud.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_355/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning refusal of legal aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, appealed against a decision of the Cantonal Court of Valais rejecting his request for legal aid in the cantonal criminal proceedings. The lower court justified this by the hopelessness of the case, in particular because the appellant could not demonstrate his victim status under Art. 116 StPO and did not engage with the reasoning of the contested decision.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_239/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning violation of rights in medical assessment
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, filed an appeal against an alleged violation of his rights in connection with an assessment by Dr. med. B.________. The lower court, the Insurance Court of the Canton of St. Gallen, did not admit the appeal due to lack of a suitable object of appeal by decision of March 9, 2026.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_483/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning violation of the ordre public
Summary of the Facts
An Ivorian professional footballer concluded several contracts with a French agent and his companies, including a management contract and an agency contract subject to Swiss Code of Obligations (CO). After his contract termination, the agent and companies initiated arbitration proceedings at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which awarded a payment of 155,000 euros. The footballer appealed to the Federal Supreme Court claiming, among other things, a violation of ordre public.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_294/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning legal aid
Summary of the Facts
The complainants A.A.________ and B.A.________ had filed a criminal complaint against a non-prosecution order of the public prosecutor's office. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau rejected their request for legal aid and representation and obliged them to provide security. They then filed a criminal appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_506/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning non-prosecution order
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Supreme Court deals with an appeal against the decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Bern, Criminal Appeals Chamber, dated March 18, 2026. The Higher Court itself had not admitted an appeal against a non-prosecution order of the Regional Prosecutor's Office Bern-Mittelland dated May 26, 2025. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6B_222/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning insult and threat
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Supreme Court had to deal with an appeal by A.________ against the judgment of the Vaud Cantonal Court's criminal appellate instance dated December 8, 2025. The lower court had confirmed a first-instance district court judgment in La Côte that convicted A.________ for insult and threat. The punishment included 70 daily fines of CHF 30 each (conditional on 2 years) and a fine of CHF 600. Additionally, he was prohibited from approaching or contacting B.________ and C.________ within less than 200 meters. The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal due to insufficient reasoning.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_470/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning contribution obligation to accident insurance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG, active in the craft sector, concluded contracts for personnel leasing with four companies between 2017 and 2020. After an operational audit, Suva determined that the agreed payments were to be qualified as wages to dependent employees of A.________ AG and therefore demanded higher contribution payments. After the objection against this contribution order was rejected, the Insurance Court of the Canton of Solothurn confirmed the contribution obligation. A.________ AG filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_408/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning non-prosecution order
Summary of the Facts
The appellants appealed against the non-prosecution order of the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Basel-Stadt dated February 12, 2026. The Appellate Court of Basel-Stadt closed the proceedings by decision of March 2, 2026, as the non-prosecution order had been replaced by a new order dated February 27, 2026. The appellants then turned to the Federal Supreme Court requesting annulment of the closure decision and remand of the case to the lower court for substantive assessment.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4D_69/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning debt denial
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SAGL filed a lawsuit for debt denial against the cantonal compensation office AVS/IV/EO, which was dismissed by the Justice of the Peace of the Paradiso district on November 10, 2025. The Civil Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Ticino dismissed the appeal on March 5, 2026. A.________ SAGL then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court on April 22, 2026.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_130/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning disability pension
Summary of the Facts
A.________ (born 1962) applied to the IV Office St. Gallen for benefits due to physical pain existing for ten years. After medical and occupational assessment, the IV Office rejected a pension entitlement in a preliminary decision based on 80% work capacity and a disability degree of 16%. The alleged pension entitlement was finally denied by decision dated February 14, 2025. The Insurance Court of the Canton of St. Gallen dismissed A.________'s appeal. A.________ requested the Federal Supreme Court to grant a full disability pension as of September 1, 2023, or at least to remand for reassessment.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_255/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning supplementary benefits to AHV/IV
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, challenged a decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Glarus, which dismissed her appeal against the objection decision of the Glarus Compensation Office. The case concerned an adjustment of supplementary benefits to AHV from May 2025 and the consideration of health insurance costs. The lower court had determined that a retroactive adjustment of the entitlement amount before May 2025 was excluded.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_465/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning extension of pre-trial detention
Summary of the Facts
An appellant suspected of attempted murder and other bodily injury offenses applied for the lifting of his pre-trial detention. The suspect, a Portuguese national, has lived in Switzerland for about six years and is suspected of having injured and threatened his former partner with a knife. The first instance dismissed his release request and extended the detention due to flight risk. The appellant argued that the reasoning for flight risk was arbitrary.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_40/2024: Non-admission of the appeal concerning unlawful anti-competitive agreements in structural and civil engineering
Summary of the Facts
The "Engadin I" investigation of the Competition Commission (WEKO) dealt with allegations of unlawful anti-competitive agreements in structural and civil engineering in the Lower Engadin, particularly involving the D.________ group and G.________ AG. Following bonus reports from participants, WEKO conducted investigations and sanctioned the appellants, including D.________ AG, E.________ AG, and F.________, with a fine of CHF 4,945,045, later reduced by the Federal Administrative Court to CHF 2,463,674.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6B_1016/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning violence or threat against authorities
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ was convicted by the District Court of Lausanne on February 27, 2025, for violence or threat against authorities and officials (Art. 285 SCC) to a conditional fine and a penalty. His behavior during an apartment eviction on June 15, 2022, was classified as violent, aggressive, and oppositional. The Vaud Cantonal Court confirmed this decision on October 28, 2025. A.________ then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, requesting acquittal and subsidiarily remand to the lower court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_208/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning safety certificate for electrical installations
Summary of the Facts
A.________ and B.________, co-owners of a single-family house, were repeatedly requested by the network operator to provide the safety certificate for low-voltage electrical installations. After unused deadlines and involvement of the Federal Inspectorate for Heavy Current Installations (ESTI), fee-based orders were issued demanding submission of the certificate. The appellants challenged the order before the Federal Administrative Court and failed. Before the Federal Supreme Court, they requested, among other things, annulment of all decisions and postponement of the control deadline citing infection risk.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6B_73/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning forgery of certificates and animal cruelty
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ was convicted by the District Court of Broye and Nord Vaud and later by the Vaud Cantonal Court for forgery of titles and animal cruelty. He allegedly operated an extensive business with forged COVID-19 vaccination certificates between 2020 and 2021. Between November 2022, he also kept two horses under inadequate conditions, endangering their well-being. Before the Federal Supreme Court, A.________ demanded acquittal in both cases, citing evidentiary and procedural errors.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_185/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning termination of tenancy
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG (landlord) terminated the tenancy of a family house used by a community of heirs (consisting of B.B.________, C.B.________, and D.B.________) as of December 31, 2023, due to planned renovation work. The lower courts declared the termination null and void with reference to formal requirements under Art. 266n CO because it was not separately served to B.B.________'s husband. The appellant argued that the community of heirs was the main tenant and thus the requirements of Art. 266n CO were not fulfilled.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_211/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning non-prosecution of criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The appellants A.________ and B.________ appealed against a decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich regarding the non-prosecution of criminal proceedings. Due to their conduct in the previous proceedings, a security deposit was required.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.