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. Complete summaries of all judgments are available in the Lexplorer portal. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments individually tailored to your areas of law.
2C_207/2026: Dismissal of the Appeal concerning Detention Pending Deportation
Summary of the Facts
- The appellant, a Ukrainian national, entered Switzerland illegally on 27 September 2025, despite entry bans from Germany and Austria.
- He filed an application for temporary protection (protection status S), which was rejected. On 7 January 2026, he was criminally convicted, among other things for theft, and was ordered to be expelled from the country for eight years.
- After his expulsion, he re-entered Switzerland on 20 January 2026 and was taken into detention pending deportation. He filed an appeal against this, which was dismissed by the lower court.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The admissibility requirements were examined and the appeal was declared admissible for review.
- **E.3:** The conditions for detention pending deportation according to Art. 76 para. 1 FNA (final expulsion order, foreseeability of enforcement, existence of grounds for detention) were affirmed by the lower court. Grounds for detention existed because the appellant repeatedly entered illegally and resisted official requirements.
- **E.4:** A final decision concerning the application for temporary protection exists. Administrative detention does not obstruct the foreseeability of enforcement of the expulsion.
- **E.5:** The appellant’s allegations that he would face repression and health problems upon return to Ukraine (Art. 3 ECHR, non-refoulement) were deemed insufficiently substantiated. No concrete risks ("real risk") were asserted.
- **E.6:** The three-month detention pending deportation was assessed as proportionate and lawful.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was dismissed and the request for legal aid was granted. No court costs were imposed and the legal counsel received compensation from the court fund.
7B_333/2026: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning Deficient Reasoning and Non-Compliance with Security Deposit
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a criminal complaint against a third party. The Regional Public Prosecutor’s Office Berner Jura-Seeland did not take up the criminal procedure. The appeal against this decision, combined with the demand for a security deposit, was not admitted by the Bern Cantonal Court due to non-fulfillment of the security deposit and expiry of the collection deadline. The appeal filed with the Federal Supreme Court failed due to insufficient reasoning.
Summary of the Considerations
The lower court found that the appellant let the collection deadline for official notifications lapse unused, although he should have expected notifications. According to Art. 85 para. 4 lit. a CPC, service is deemed to have taken place on the seventh day after the unsuccessful delivery attempt. The appellant’s claim that he was absent from the location does not change this. According to Art. 42 paras. 1 and 2 FSC, appeals to the Federal Supreme Court must be clearly reasoned. Especially for fundamental rights violations, qualified reasoning requirements apply. The appellant did not raise a sufficient complaint that would make the lower court’s decision appear legally flawed. Arbitrary conduct or a violated legal norm according to Art. 95 FSC was not substantiated. Due to the obvious deficiencies in reasoning, the appeal is not admitted in the simplified procedure pursuant to Art. 108 FSC. The appeal is without prospects of success, so legal aid is also refused.
Summary of the Dispositive
The dispositive determines that the appeal is not admitted, the request for legal aid is rejected, court costs are imposed, and the judgment is served on the parties.
5A_485/2026: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning Enforcement
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed a complaint pursuant to Art. 17 DEBA with the supervisory authorities over the Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Office Basel-Stadt. The lower supervisory authority did not admit it on 18 March 2026. Against this decision, the appellant filed an appeal with the Appellate Court of Basel-Stadt, which on 18 May 2026 also did not admit it due to lack of a valid request and insufficient reasoning. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the Considerations
E.1: The Federal Supreme Court examined whether the Appellate Court rightly did not admit the appeal. It found that the appellant’s appeal lacked sufficient reasoning pursuant to Art. 42 para. 2 FSC. A targeted engagement with the relevant considerations of the lower court was missing. In particular, the appellant did not claim or prove that the request classified as new by the lower court had already been made before the lower supervisory authority. Also, her invocation of an alleged right to rectification was insufficiently developed. E.2: Due to the obvious inadequacy of the reasoning, the Federal Supreme Court did not admit the appeal in the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b FSC.
Summary of the Dispositive
The dispositive states that the appeal is not admitted, court costs of CHF 1,000 are imposed on the appellant, and the judgment is served.
4A_571/2025: Judgment concerning Daily Sickness Benefits and Recusal
Summary of the Facts
The insured person (A.________) was employed by two employers and was collectively insured under the respective daily sickness benefits insurance. After termination of her employment relationships, the insured person disputed claims for daily sickness benefits with the insurers C.________ AG and D.________ AG. Key points were the cessation of benefits by C.________ AG due to alleged breach of cooperation obligations and the question of responsibility regarding a benefit decision by D.________ AG. In addition, a possible bias of a court clerk of the lower court was alleged.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_285/2026: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning International Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters
Summary of the Facts
The case concerns the question of international administrative assistance in tax matters between Switzerland and Italy based on the Double Taxation Agreement (DTA CH-IT). The Italian authorities requested information about bank accounts and asset movements of a Swiss taxpayer. The Swiss Federal Tax Administration (FTA) granted the assistance, against which the affected party filed an appeal. After the Federal Administrative Court rejected the appeal, the Federal Supreme Court was called upon.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_75/2026: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning Supplementary Benefits to AHV/IV
Summary of the Facts
A.________ applied to the Caisse de compensation du canton du Valais for supplementary benefits to AHV/IV, which was rejected by decision of 11 November 2025. He filed an objection against this, which was still undecided. On 17 December 2025, A.________ filed an appeal for denial of justice with the Cour des assurances sociales of the Tribunal cantonal du Valais. The cantonal instance dismissed this appeal on 27 January 2026 and declared the appeal against the decision of 11 November 2025 premature. A.________ filed two appeals with the Federal Supreme Court: 1. Appeal against the decision of the lower court of 27 January 2026, aiming to compel the fund to decide immediately on the objection (8C_75/2026). 2. Appeal for alleged denial of justice in the further handling of the case, combined with the demand for a judgment by April 2026 (8C_230/2026).
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
9C_78/2026: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning Cost Coverage for Stairlift
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, has been receiving disability insurance benefits since 1998, including a full disability pension and various aids. On 20 October 2022, she applied for coverage of the costs for installing a stairlift. Medical opinions confirmed her need, but the responsible cantonal office rejected the request. The cantonal lower court confirmed this decision.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_408/2026: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning Pledge Enforcement (Real Estate)
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, owner of a property, filed an appeal against the sales advertisement for the forced auction of his property, which was created by the cantonal debt enforcement office. The appeal was dismissed by the cantonal supervisory authority because the advertisement contained all legally required information. The appellant argued that a pending criminal investigation against a creditor should have been taken into account, but failed due to the lack of legal basis for a suspension of the auction.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_509/2026: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning Official Defense Counsel
Summary of the Facts
In the underlying criminal case, the appellant, A.________, was convicted by penal order for various offenses (simple bodily injury, insult, threat, and assault) with a conditional fine, a connected fine, and an additional fine. A.________ objected and requested the appointment of official defense counsel, which was rejected by the public prosecutor’s office. The appeal against this decision was also dismissed by the Bern Cantonal Court. Subsequently, the appellant brought the case to the Federal Supreme Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_699/2025: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning Issuance of a Residence Permit
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a Bangladeshi national, entered Switzerland illegally in 2010 and filed an unsuccessful asylum application. Despite a final expulsion order, he remained unlawfully in Switzerland for more than 15 years. After failed previous remedies, he again applied for a hardship permit, which was also rejected by the Administrative Court of St. Gallen in the last instance. He filed an appeal against this decision with the Federal Supreme Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_317/2026: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning Restoration of the Deadline
Summary of the Facts
The appellant had applied before the Geneva Tribunal de première instance for a super-provisional and provisional measure, which was deemed inadmissible by decision of 12.12.2025. After service of this decision on 19.12.2025 and expiry of the appeal deadline on 29.12.2025, the appellant requested restoration of the deadline on 20.02.2026. He justified this with a psychosomatic rehabilitation from 17.12.2025 to 10.02.2026. The Cour de justice of the Canton of Geneva rejected the restoration request. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_323/2025: Appeal concerning the Integration of GAV Provisions into the Individual Employment Contract
Summary of the Facts
An employee (respondent) sued her employer (appellant), a foundation, regarding the application of certain provisions of a collective labor agreement (GAV "CCT Social") to her employment contract. In particular, it concerned compensation for night work according to Art. 3.7 GAV "CCT Social." The employer argued that it was allowed to deviate from this provision based on a decision of the Parity Commission (CPP) of the GAV. The employee demanded retroactive financial claims as well as the determination of contractual application of the GAV rules.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_506/2025: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning DNA Expertise in Paternity Proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The present dispute concerns a challenge to the order of a DNA expertise in the context of a paternity proceeding. The child, represented by her curator, requested a paternity determination by DNA analysis. The competent cantonal court ordered this expertise after the alleged father denied paternity. The appellant then turned to the Federal Supreme Court, alleging among other things an incorrect assessment of the facts and a violation of the rules of burden of proof.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_474/2026: Federal Supreme Court Decision concerning Non-Admissibility of an Appeal in Criminal Matters
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal in criminal matters against the decision of the indictment chamber of the canton of St. Gallen dated 14 April 2026. In the cantonal criminal proceedings, it had been decided that the indictment under Art. 324 para. 2 CPC was not contestable, and consequently the cantonal appeal was not admitted.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_1100/2025: Non-Admissibility of the Appeal concerning the Exercise of the Statutory Right of First Refusal
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Supreme Court is dealing with proceedings concerning an appeal by an unsuccessful highest bidder who wanted to challenge the award of an agricultural property based on the claimed statutory right of first refusal by the tenant. The appeal concerns the question of whether this right was properly exercised.
The complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.