Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the latest judgments of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositive parts. For the other judgments, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all judgments are available on the portal of Lexplorer. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your legal fields.
4F_4/2025: Revision of the Federal Court Decision
Summary of the Facts
On October 9, 2020, A.________ SA and B.________ SA entered into an indefinite lease agreement for commercial premises, with the first termination option on December 31, 2025. Disputed was, among other things, whether the rent adjustments according to the contract were lawful and whether other claims of A.________ SA were justified. After previous instances (decision of the Praetor and the II Chamber of the Cantonal Court), the Federal Court declared the legal step taken by A.________ SA on February 3, 2025, to be insufficiently substantiated and thus inadmissible. A.________ SA subsequently applied for a revision of this Federal Court decision.
Summary of the Considerations
1. (1) Examination of the facts: The lease was concluded for at least five years, making the rent adjustment according to the national consumer price index legally binding. 2. (6.1) Requirements for a revision: It was clarified that sole complaints regarding the application of legal norms or allegedly missing reasoning do not constitute grounds for revision within the meaning of Art. 121 LTF. 3. (6.2) Missed deadline: The "supplementary submissions" of A.________ SA from March 24, 2025, exceeded the 30-day deadline according to Art. 124 para. 1 LTF, thus they could not be taken into account. 4. (7) Conclusion: The revision requests did not meet the legal requirements and were therefore inadmissible.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The revision requests were declared inadmissible, and the court costs were imposed on A.________ SA.
5A_215/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of a Complaint in Enforcement Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The complainant opposed the execution of a seizure as well as the issuance of the seizure certificate and filed a complaint. After his complaints were rejected by the cantonal authorities, he applied to the Federal Court for the restoration of the complaint deadline, arguing that he had not received the invitation for the delivery of the decision. The Federal Court found that the complaint was submitted late and therefore did not enter into it.
Summary of the Considerations
1. (Para. 1) Overview of the procedural history and the late submission of the complaint. 2. (Para. 2) Examination of the complainant's statements regarding the delivery of the decision and assessment of the request for restoration of the deadline. The Federal Court confirmed the presumption of delivery and stated that the complainant could not present any concrete indications of errors in postal delivery to refute the assumption of proper delivery. The request for restoration of the deadline was therefore rejected, and the complaint remained late. 3. (Para. 3) Decision not to impose court costs and determination of the lack of object of the request for legal aid.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The request for restoration of the deadline was rejected, and the complaint was not considered. No court costs were imposed.
1C_138/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint Against the Decision to Restore a Lawful State
Summary of the Facts
The owner A.________ of a historic property in the municipality of Freiburg modified a protected part of the building by inserting an opening into the southeastern facade. The neighbor B.________ filed an objection against this. After years of proceedings and several decisions by cantonal authorities (including the prefecture and cantonal court), the cantonal court finally ordered the restoration of the lawful state. A.________ appealed this decision to the Federal Court.
Summary of the Considerations
(2.1) The primary path for complaints in public matters according to Art. 82 lit. a BGG is open for disputes in the field of construction and spatial planning. The subsidiary constitutional complaint path is not permissible, as the main reasons fall under public construction law. (2.2) The contested decision of the cantonal court constitutes an interim ruling, as final references to deadlines and conditions for the structural restoration by the prefecture are still pending. Such interim decisions can only be contested directly in the Federal Court under exceptional conditions. (2.3) Although the decision properly establishes the lawful state, discretion remains with the prefecture regarding further details and the embedding of deadlines and modalities for the implementation of the works. (2.4) The complainant could not assert any immediate irreversible damage that would arise from waiting for the prefecture's decisions. Moreover, there is the possibility of later continuing these submissions against the prefecture's decision at the cantonal and then federal levels. (2.5) The requirements for a direct complaint according to Art. 93 BGG (irreparable damage or procedural economy) are not met.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The complaint was declared inadmissible, and court costs were imposed.
4A_536/2024: Unfair Competition
Summary of the Facts
A.________, shareholder and managing director of C.________ GmbH, derived claims against the vehicle manufacturer Ba.________ AG from the use of a leased vehicle, whose engine control software had an illegal defeat device. After the vehicle registration was revoked, A.________ claimed damages, profit sharing, and claims under competition law. The Commercial Court of the Canton of Zurich denied both jurisdiction and legal grounds for the claims. A.________ subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_119/2025: Decision on the Renewal Application for a Residence Permit After Divorce
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, a foreign national, received a residence permit through family reunification after marrying a Swiss citizen in 2021. Following the separation and allegations of domestic violence, the Canton of Freiburg refused to renew the permit, which was confirmed by the cantonal court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_544/2024: Calculation of the Existence Minimum with Variable Income
Summary of the Facts
The complainant objected to the calculation of his existence minimum by the Olten-Gösgen Enforcement Office. In particular, the late payment of a difference between his existence minimum and his variable income, as well as the application of a reduced basic amount due to an assumed cohabitation situation, were presented as erroneous. The lower authority rejected the complaint as far as it considered it.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_334/2024: Revision of the Municipal Zoning Plan Regarding Properties in Gilly
Summary of the Facts
The municipality of Gilly revised its zoning plan to reduce oversized building zones in accordance with Art. 15 para. 2 LAT. The properties No. 490 and 491 of A.________ and B.________ were partially removed from the building zone and assigned to the protected vineyard zone (Art. 16 LAT). The owners opposed this reallocation, which was confirmed by municipal and cantonal authorities.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_177/2025: Decision on the Admissibility of the Complaint in Asylum Law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ applied for asylum in Switzerland on September 4, 2022. It turned out that a previous request from him had already been registered in Austria on August 26, 2022. The State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) did not consider the asylum application in Switzerland and ordered his expulsion to Austria. After an initial court approval by the Federal Administrative Court, the non-consideration was confirmed by the SEM in 2024. The Federal Administrative Court rejected a complaint against this decision. A.________ filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court aiming to remain in Switzerland.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_73/2024: Judgment Regarding the Use of Swiss Airspace by a Foreign Ultralight Aircraft
Summary of the Facts
A French-registered ultralight aircraft (AVEKO VL-3 E, maximum 525 kg, aerodynamically controlled, combustion engine) was to be approved for use in Swiss airspace without special permission and time limits upon request by the owners and an association. The Federal Office of Civil Aviation (BAZL) and the Federal Administrative Court rejected this. The approval was limited to a maximum of two months per year. The pilot and the association filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_77/2024: Judgment Regarding the Refusal of a Cross-Border Commuter Permit for an EU/EFTA National
Summary of the Facts
The Italian citizen A.________ applied in 2018 for a new cross-border commuter permit to pursue a professional activity in the Canton of Ticino. Due to three final convictions from the years 2009, 2012, and 2016, his application was rejected on grounds of public order. This decision was confirmed by the cantonal authorities. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against this.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_222/2025: Judgment on a Complaint Regarding Bankruptcy Declaration
Summary of the Facts
The complainant applied for the opening of bankruptcy proceedings due to her insolvency. Her application was rejected by the District Court of Winterthur and later by the Cantonal Court of Zurich. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court, in which she again demanded the opening of bankruptcy proceedings as well as the announcement of the required amount of a minimum bankruptcy dividend.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
4A_112/2025: Decision Not to Enter in a Procedure Concerning Organizational Deficiencies of a GmbH
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ GmbH in liquidation was dissolved by the District Court of St. Gallen due to an organizational deficiency, and its liquidation was ordered under bankruptcy law (decision of January 6, 2025). An appeal against this decision was not addressed by the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen due to insufficient reasoning (decision of February 6, 2025). The GmbH filed a complaint with the Federal Court on March 6, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_46/2023: Permit Dispute Regarding Local Sports Betting and Legal Standing of the Inter-Cantonal Gambling Supervision
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ cooperative received a permit from the City Police of St. Gallen for a local sports betting event related to a pig race. The inter-cantonal gambling supervision (Gespa) appealed and later filed a complaint, arguing that a pig race could not be approved as a local sports betting event. The Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen did not enter into the Gespa's complaint, reasoning that it was not legally entitled to do so.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
1C_333/2024: Judgment Regarding the Revision of the Municipal Zoning Plan of the Municipality of Gilly
Summary of the Facts
The municipality of Gilly revised its zoning plan, which had been in place since 1984, due to the overdimensioning of the building zone according to Art. 15 para. 2 LAT. The disputed parcel No. 470 is partially located in a zone for villa construction and partially in a vineyard zone. The new zoning plan provides that the undeveloped area of the parcel will be transferred to the "protected vineyard zone," while the existing development will remain classified in the zone with very low density. A.________, the owner of the parcel, unsuccessfully raised objections against this change and is appealing the matter to the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
9C_709/2024: Decision on the Pension Amount in Disability Insurance
Summary of the Facts
A.________, born in 1988, has suffered from multiple sclerosis, which has a relapsing course, since his youth. He submitted several applications for benefits from disability insurance between 2016 and 2019. After a prolonged procedure, the responsible office of disability insurance in the Canton of Freiburg recognized the entitlement to a half disability pension in 2022. In October 2022, the insured requested a revision of the pension, claiming a deterioration in his health condition. The administration rejected an increase in the pension, which the insured further brought to court. The cantonal court increased the pension retroactively to 60% from January 2024. With the present legal remedy, the insured requested the entitlement to a full disability pension from the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_23/2024: Decision on the Use of Revenues from Market-Oriented Allocation Procedures
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ AG requested a reconsideration of two decisions by ElCom regarding the use of auction proceeds from the market-oriented allocation procedures for the years 2022 and 2023. ElCom did not enter into the request for reconsideration, as it did not consider A.________ AG to be directly affected. The Federal Administrative Court and the Federal Court confirmed this decision not to enter.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
8C_632/2024: Decision on the Recovery of Supplementary Benefits and Health Insurance Premium Reductions
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, a recipient of a disability pension and cantonal supplementary benefits, received payments based on incomplete information regarding the surrender value of a life insurance policy. The responsible authority demanded the repayment of overpaid benefits as well as health insurance premium reductions through several consecutive decisions. After rejection by the cantonal authority, a revision procedure was initiated before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
8C_128/2025: Federal Court Judgment on Social Assistance and the Admissibility of a Legal Remedy
Summary of the Facts
A.________, father of a daughter and a long-term recipient of social assistance from the "Hospice général," received support funds. The daughter received scholarships for the academic years 2022/2023 and 2023/2024. The social authority demanded partial reimbursement of the social assistance that was overestimated for the year 2022 to 2023 due to the unconsidered scholarships. The cantonal courts rejected the objection against the reimbursement demand.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_443/2024: Decision on the Admissibility of a Complaint in Civil Matters and a Subsidiary Constitutional Complaint in Neighbor Law
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court dealt with a complaint from the owner of a property (A.________), who opposed a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Aargau that had obliged him to fell a black pine that violated cantonal distance regulations. The complainant wanted to have the decision annulled and completely dismiss the neighbors' claims B.________ and C.________.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
4A_466/2024: Judgment on Copyright Protection of Musical Instruments
Summary of the Facts
The complainants, manufacturers and distributors of musical instruments ("Hang" or "Handpan"), seek a declaration that the defendants cannot claim copyright protection for these instruments. They also request a determination that their own instruments do not constitute copyright infringements. The Commercial Court of the Canton of Bern partially did not enter into the lawsuit and dismissed it in other respects.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_779/2024: Withdrawal of the Right of Determination of Residence and Outplacement of Minor Children
Summary of the Facts
The parents of three minor children have long been facing family and domestic conflicts, particularly incidents of domestic violence by the father. Following a risk report from the school and further reports, the Child and Adult Protection Authority (KESB) ordered various child protection measures, including the super-provisional and precautionary withdrawal of the right of determination of residence and the placement of the children in a home. The mother unsuccessfully contested this up to the Cantonal Court of Zurich and brought the case before the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
9C_129/2025: Inadmissibility of an Appeal Related to the Rejection of Disability Insurance Benefits
Summary of the Facts
A.________ submitted a request for disability insurance benefits in January 2023, which was rejected by the cantonal office for disability insurance of the Canton of Vaud on May 23, 2024. The Cantonal Court of the Canton of Vaud confirmed this decision on January 28, 2025. The complainant filed an appeal with the Federal Court on February 28, 2025, along with a request for legal aid.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
2C_118/2025: Procedure Regarding Interim Decision on Suspensive Effect in Public Procurement Law
Summary of the Facts
The complainants (A.________, consisting of B.________ AG, C.________ GmbH, and D.________ AG) had filed a complaint against the award of a construction contract for the Morschacher Tunnel by the Cantonal Council of Schwyz and requested suspensive effect. The single judge of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz initially withdrew the suspensive effect but then granted it again until further notice. The complainants appealed to the Federal Court against the interim decision of January 23, 2025, which became moot as the Administrative Court issued the final decision on March 5, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
8C_169/2025: Procedural Requirements in Accident Insurance Law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ requested benefits from Suva for shoulder complaints, which he claimed were a relapse from an incident in 2000. Suva denied this obligation to provide benefits based on a previous, legally binding decision. The Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau confirmed this decision, after which the complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
7B_22/2025: Inadmissibility in Juvenile Criminal Law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a criminal complaint against B.________ on November 5, 2022, for false accusation. The Youth Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Aargau ordered on July 1, 2024, not to initiate proceedings. A complaint against this decision was rejected by the Cantonal Court of Aargau on December 10, 2024. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Court and requested the initiation of a criminal investigation.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.
5A_217/2025: Inadmissibility of the Recusal Request in Divorce Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The complainant (wife) requested the transfer of the proceedings to another canton in connection with an ongoing divorce proceeding, as she alleged bias on the part of the responsible district judge. Her arguments were based on various decisions of the district judge as well as on difficulties in finding legal representation. The Cantonal Court of Lucerne rejected the recusal request. It found that there was no sufficient appearance of bias and that institutional recusal requests were inadmissible. The complainant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the portal.