Latest Judgments of the Federal Supreme Court
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Supreme Court (FSCO) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present detailed summaries with facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the other 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 legal fields.
2C_260/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning asylum and removal proceedings
Summary of the facts
A Romanian national filed an asylum application, which was rejected by the State Secretariat for Migration (SEM). At the same time, his removal from Switzerland was ordered. An appeal against this decision was dismissed by the Federal Administrative Court insofar as it was admissible. A subsequent appeal to the Federal Supreme Court, filed by electronically signed submission, included, among other things, a request for a stay of enforcement and legal aid free of charge.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1:** The SEM rejected the appellant's asylum application and ordered his removal. The Federal Administrative Court then dismissed the appellant's appeal. - **E.2:** The electronic submission of 6 May 2026 was not validly signed and therefore inadmissible. A referral for defect remedy was waived. - **E.3:** The appeal in public law matters is inadmissible because it is directed against a decision of the Federal Administrative Court in the field of asylum law (Art. 83 lit. d no. 1 BGG). No exception applies. A subsidiary constitutional complaint is also excluded. - **E.4:** The question of whether the appellant intended to challenge the further order of the Federal Administrative Court remains unanswered, as this has no impact on the decision on the inadmissibility of the appeal. - **E.5:** The appeal is deemed obviously inadmissible. The request for a stay of enforcement and legal aid free of charge becomes moot.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal is not admitted, and no court costs are imposed. The judgment is communicated to the parties and the Federal Administrative Court.
6B_1274/2023: Non-admission of the appeal concerning professional receiving of stolen goods
Summary of the facts
An appellant was convicted by the Criminal Court of the District of Eastern Vaud on 8 September 2022, among other things, for “Recel par métier” (professional receiving of stolen goods) and sentenced to a conditional prison term of 12 months. This judgment was confirmed by the Court of Appeal of the Vaud Cantonal Court on 4 May 2023. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court to challenge, among other things, his conviction, clarify the role of the private plaintiff ("B.________ SA") in the proceedings, and allege a violation of the right to be heard.
Summary of the considerations
1. **Admissibility (E.1):** The Federal Supreme Court finds that an appeal in criminal matters is admissible, while the subsidiary constitutional complaint route is excluded. 2. **Right to be heard and evidence (E.2-E.3):** The appellant complains of a violation of his right to be heard and requests further evidence. The Federal Supreme Court rejects this because neither a violation of procedural principles nor a lack of objectivity by the cantonal instance is evident. 3. **Status of the private plaintiff (E.4):** The Federal Supreme Court follows previous case law (ATF 140 IV 162) and decides that B.________ SA is not a direct injured party within the meaning of criminal procedural law, even if it assumed the rights of another company by merger. Its involvement as a party was therefore unlawful. 4. **Evidence obtained with the participation of the private plaintiff (E.5):** The inadmissibility of the private plaintiff’s participation does not lead to the inadmissibility of the evidence, as no serious procedural errors exist. 5. **Existence of a predicate offense (E.6.1):** The Federal Supreme Court confirms that the stolen computers are to be considered third-party property and thus constitute a predicate offense within the meaning of Art. 160 Swiss Criminal Code. 6. **Subjective elements of the offense (E.6.4):** The Federal Supreme Court holds that the appellant at least had conditional intent, knowing that the computers originated from crimes. 7. **Professional activity as an aggravating circumstance (E.6.5):** The professional execution of Recel par métier was not disputed.
Summary of the dispositive
The constitutional complaint was declared inadmissible, while the main appeal was partially upheld and the judgment of the lower instance was annulled. Court costs were ordered and party compensation granted.
5A_271/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning opening of bankruptcy proceedings
Summary of the facts
The Federal Supreme Court deals with an appeal by A.________ SA against a cantonal decision confirming the opening of bankruptcy proceedings against the appellant. The appellant had claimed to have fully repaid the debt underlying the opening of bankruptcy and demonstrated her solvency.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1:** The cantonal court found that the appellant had not provided proof of payment of the court-ordered procedural costs. Furthermore, the legal requirements of Art. 174 para. 2 SchKG were not met, as neither timely proof of debt repayment nor solvency was plausibly demonstrated. - **E.4.1:** According to the Federal Supreme Court’s consistent case law, proof pursuant to Art. 174 para. 2 SchKG must be provided within the appeal period. Evidence submitted after the deadline is inadmissible. - **E.4.2:** The appellant could not prove that the court-determined procedural costs had been paid within the ten-day period pursuant to Art. 321 para. 2 ZPO cum Art. 251 lit. a ZPO. The lower court thus did not act arbitrarily. Moreover, the appellant's solvency is irrelevant for the decision, as the requirements under Art. 174 para. 2 SchKG must be cumulatively fulfilled. - **E.5:** Due to the insufficient substantiation of the appeal pursuant to Art. 42 para. 2 and Art. 106 para. 2 BGG, the decision was clear. The appellant’s request for suspension of enforcement falls away.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was declared inadmissible and court costs were imposed on the appellant. The decision will be communicated to the parties and the Civil Chamber of the Geneva Cantonal Court.
6B_858/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning social insurance fraud
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ was convicted by the District Court of Eastern Vaud on 24 February 2025 of social insurance fraud and sentenced to six months conditional imprisonment with a probation period of five years and a five-year expulsion order. The appeal against this judgment was dismissed by the Criminal Court of the Vaud Cantonal Court on 28 August 2025.
Full summary of the judgment is available on the Portal.
6B_723/2025: Dismissal of the appeal concerning violation of privacy and sexual acts
Summary of the facts
A.________ was convicted by the Sarine District Court on 22 May 2024, among other things, for violation of privacy by recording devices and sexual acts with a person unable to judge or resist, sentenced to 30 months imprisonment (6 months unconditional, 24 months conditional on 5 years). Furthermore, A.________ was banned for life from professional or organized non-professional activities involving regular contact with particularly vulnerable persons or activities in the health sector. The Fribourg Cantonal Court confirmed the conviction on 18 June 2025.
Full summary of the judgment is available on the Portal.
5A_975/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning maintenance contributions
Summary of the facts
The parties B.________ (born 1974) and A.________ (born 1984) have been married since 2012 and are parents of two children, C.________ (born 2012) and D.________ (born 2018). After the separation in July 2020, A.________ filed for divorce. By order of 28 January 2025, the first-instance court set provisional maintenance payments of CHF 390/month per child and CHF 1,560/month for the wife. In second instance, the Civil Chamber of the Geneva Cantonal Court altered these amounts: the wife was to pay the husband CHF 620 monthly for C.________ from 1 October 2024, while the husband was to pay CHF 100 for D.________ and CHF 660 (limited duration until 30 June 2024) for the wife. A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, mainly requesting the annulment of the second-instance decisions.
Full summary of the judgment is available on the Portal.
5A_16/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning post-marital maintenance
Summary of the facts
A.________ (appellant) and B.________ (respondent) have been married since 1996 but have lived separately since 2013. The Brugg District Court dissolved the marriage and ordered the respondent to pay post-marital maintenance. After the respondent’s appeal, the Aargau Cantonal Court reduced the maintenance and dismissed the appellant's subsequent appeal. The appellant requested higher post-marital maintenance in the appeal.
Full summary of the judgment is available on the Portal.
5A_298/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning enforcement proceedings
Summary of the facts
The Association A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court in an enforcement matter concerning the seizure and removal of vehicles by the Office cantonal des poursuites de Genève. The cantonal supervisory authority had declared its appeal inadmissible because it was not filed in a timely manner. The appellant then filed a civil appeal against this decision.
Full summary of the judgment is available on the Portal.
5A_107/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning reassessment of property in mortgage enforcement proceedings
Summary of the facts
The judgment concerns a request for reassessment of a property within mortgage enforcement proceedings. The appellants wanted to adjust the property’s valuation due to general price increases. The Cantonal Court dismissed the request due to abuse of rights, as reassessment would not serve the appellants’ declared goal of achieving the highest possible sales price but was solely aimed at delaying the proceedings.
Full summary of the judgment is available on the Portal.
5A_1077/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning civil action against the ranking plan
Summary of the facts
The appellant, A.________, initiated debt enforcement proceedings against a debtor, leading to the preparation of ranking plans and distribution lists by the Geneva Debt Enforcement Office. After amendments to these files by the office, the appellant filed a complaint under Art. 17 SchKG, which the cantonal supervisory authority declared inadmissible by decision of 11 December 2025. The appellant then filed a civil complaint and a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment is available on the Portal.
6B_83/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning advance payment of costs
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal against a judgment of the Corte di appello e di revisione penale of the Canton of Ticino (CARP), which, among other things, rejected a request for revision. The Federal Supreme Court requested the appellant to pay an advance on costs pursuant to Art. 62 BGG. Despite several deadlines and ultimately a non-extendable final deadline decision, the appellant failed to pay. She repeatedly applied for suspension of proceedings and deferral of the advance, relying on reasons that the Federal Supreme Court deemed insufficient and largely foreseeable.
Full summary of the judgment is available on the Portal.