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 you with detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the subsequent judgments, you will find a summary of the facts in each case. The complete 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.
5A_124/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning personal contact and child support
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ and the respondent B.________, parents of a common son (born 2022), have been living separately since August 2024. The District Court of Dielsdorf regulated the separation, granted sole custody to the mother, and ordered child support. On appeal by the father, the Zurich Superior Court denied the father the right to personal contact with the child (except for correspondence contact) and redefined the maintenance contributions. A.________ filed an appeal in civil matters (alternatively subsidiarily a constitutional complaint). He requested, among other things, a new custody arrangement and a different allocation of costs.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1**: The appeal in civil matters is the correct legal remedy, rendering the subsidiary constitutional complaint inadmissible. Child support is no longer a subject of dispute (E.1.2). - **E.2**: Marital protection decisions may only be challenged regarding the violation of constitutional rights, where the strict principle of complaint applies. Insufficiently reasoned complaints are not admitted. - **E.3**: The appellant’s allegations (arbitrariness, violation of the right to be heard, lack of fair trial) are either insufficiently substantiated or unfounded. In particular, the appeal does not meet the high requirements for reasoning (E.3.1). - **E.3.3**: The subsidiary complaint of disproportionate measures is inadmissible, as no sufficient infringement of fundamental rights is demonstrated. - **E.4**: The appeal is obviously unfounded and is assessed summarily (Art. 109 BGG).
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was dismissed and the court costs were imposed on the appellant, without compensation to the parties.
5A_604/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning declaration of bankruptcy and appeal reasoning
Summary of the facts
The A.________ GmbH was declared bankrupt by decision of the president of the District Court La Côte on 4 May 2026. The company filed an appeal with the cantonal appellate authority on 15 May 2026, which declared the appeal inadmissible on 22 May 2026 due to insufficient reasoning. The A.________ GmbH then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court on 24 June 2026, requesting the annulment of the cantonal decision and the granting of suspensive effect.
Summary of the considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examines the submission of A.________ GmbH as an appeal in civil matters pursuant to Art. 72 para. 2 lit. a BGG. Other requirements are not examined in depth, since the appeal is obviously without prospect of success. According to Art. 42 paras. 1 and 2 BGG, appeals must be clearly reasoned. The appellant must specifically address the grounds of inadmissibility of the lower court in an appeal directed against inadmissibility. A violation of fundamental rights is only examined if it is presented in detail and clearly. Moreover, the Federal Supreme Court is generally bound by the findings of fact of the lower court. The cantonal court found that A.________ GmbH did not present sufficient grounds against the first-instance judgment in its submission of 15 May 2026. The subject matter of the appeal was missed, and the claims against the B.________ foundation were not part of the bankruptcy proceedings. A.________ GmbH did not address the reasoning of the lower court in a substantive manner in its appeal to the Federal Supreme Court, particularly regarding the alleged insufficient reasoning. Due to lack of sufficient reasoning, the appeal is inadmissible. A.________ GmbH bears the court costs according to Art. 66 para. 1 BGG as the losing party.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court declared the appeal inadmissible, imposed court costs of 500 francs on the appellant, and arranged for notification to the involved parties and authorities.
5A_234/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning child protection measures
Summary of the facts
The appellant and the respondent are married and parents of three children. After several incidents of domestic violence, the Child and Adult Protection Authority (KESB) Bülach Nord initially ordered precautionary and later permanent deprivation of the right of residence and placement of the children outside the home. Several legal remedies against these decisions were unsuccessful. Finally, the Zurich Superior Court did not admit the appeal filed with it.
Summary of the considerations
The Federal Supreme Court finds that the appellant has standing to appeal and the formal requirements for the procedure are met. The subject of the procedure is solely the admissibility of the non-admission by the Superior Court. The Superior Court did not admit the appeal due to insufficient reasoning. Therefore, no substantive examination of the child protection measures took place by the Superior Court. The Federal Supreme Court examines whether the non-admission by the Superior Court was justified. The appellant has not sufficiently demonstrated how the non-admission could have violated constitutional provisions. The formal requirements for the appeal reasoning (Art. 42 para. 2 BGG and Art. 106 para. 2 BGG) are thus not fulfilled. No evidentiary measures are conducted; documents submitted after the contested decision are disregarded (Art. 99 para. 1 BGG). The request for legal aid and representation is dismissed due to lack of prospects of success.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court did not admit the appeal and dismissed the request for legal aid. The court costs were imposed on the appellant.
2C_356/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning denial/delay of justice regarding deregistration from the population register
Summary of the facts
A.________ was deregistered retroactively from the population register by decision of the Aarau city council because his main residence was presumed to be abroad. He filed several complaints against this: first with the Department of Economic Affairs and Interior of the Canton of Aargau and then with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau, which dismissed his complaint in March 2026. Before the Federal Supreme Court, A.________ filed a complaint for denial or delay of justice and mainly requested the annulment of the deregistration.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_570/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning non-admission order
Summary of the facts
The Regional Public Prosecutor’s Office Bern-Mittelland issued a non-admission order regarding a criminal proceeding initiated by A.________ against various persons for defamation, discrimination, coercion etc. The appellant lodged an appeal with the Bern Cantonal Superior Court and requested reinstatement of the deadline under Art. 94 CPC. The Superior Court did not admit the appeal and dismissed the request for reinstatement of the deadline.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_497/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning detention conditions and claim for compensation
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ criticizes the inadequate consideration by the lower court of the conditions of his detention regarding the guarantees of Art. 3 ECHR, which rejected a claim for sentence mitigation or compensation. The Federal Supreme Court reviewed the new factual and legal submissions relating to the alleged inhuman or degrading treatment during detention.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_338/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning insufficient identification of the debtor
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ filed a debt collection procedure against “B.________” on 7 January 2026, which was rejected by the debt collection office as inadmissible due to lack of clear identification of the debtor. After her appeal was dismissed by the supervisory authorities of the Canton of Valais, she filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court. The dispute concerns the insufficient identifiability of the debtor in the debt collection procedure.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_546/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning enforcement of an agreement
Summary of the facts
The dispute concerned a conflict between A.________ SA (appellant) and B.________ (respondent) regarding enforcement of an agreement concluded as part of an amicable settlement. This agreement was judicially approved, included removal of objects and plants on a roof, and imposed additional obligations on the appellant. Subsequently, the respondent requested enforcement, which was partially approved by the first-instance judge. This decision was confirmed by the appellate court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_481/2026: Decision on relocation of the child with clarification of joint custody
Summary of the facts
A.________ (father) and B.________ (mother) are the unmarried parents of the child C.________ (2021). The mother exercises sole parental custody and lives with the child in U.________, while the father lives in France. There is a dispute over the introduction of joint parental custody and whether the mother’s relocation with the child to Portugal should be approved. The father requested to prohibit the mother’s move abroad with the child and to grant him joint or sole custody; the mother requested permission to take the child to Portugal. The lower court granted the mother permission to move to Portugal.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_363/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning residence registration and denial/delay of justice
Summary of the facts
The appellant (A.________) was deregistered retroactively as of April 2025 in the Aarau population register because he allegedly had his main residence in Spain. He pursued his complaint against this decision up to the Federal Supreme Court. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed a complaint for denial or delay of justice in the lower instance (18 March 2026), as no undue procedural delay existed.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_168/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning defamation and attempted coercion
Summary of the facts
A divorced husband (A.A.) filed an appeal against the decision of the cantonal appellate court, which acquitted the ex-wife (B.A.) of allegations of defamation and attempted coercion. The appellant demanded confirmation of the first-instance judgment, which had found the accused guilty. The main points of dispute concerned the issuance of two payment orders by B.A., which A.A. described as abusive and an attempt at psychological influence.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_157/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning termination of employment contract
Summary of the facts
The appellant (A.________) filed a lawsuit against B.________ AG because he considered the termination of his employment contract abusive. The single judge at the Nidwalden Cantonal Court dismissed the lawsuit on 20 October 2025. The Nidwalden Superior Court also dismissed the subsequent appeal of the appellant on 3 March 2026. On 4 April 2026, the appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against the Superior Court’s decision. No submissions were requested.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_1120/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning protective measures against assaults
Summary of the facts
The appealing parents (A.A.________, B.A.________) and their two minor children (C.A.________, D.A.________) requested civil protective measures against E.________, who repeatedly committed judicially sanctioned assaults or harassment, including against the family’s children. Ultimately, the appellants challenged the dismissal of their requests by the lower courts, particularly the refusal of a contact ban and the non-ordering of electronic surveillance.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_589/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning non-payment of a cost advance in bankruptcy proceedings
Summary of the facts
The Civil Court of Basel-Stadt opened bankruptcy proceedings against the appellant (A.________ GmbH in liquidation). The appellant challenged the decision before the Basel-Stadt Court of Appeal, which did not admit the appeal due to non-payment of a cost advance. The appellant then filed an appeal in civil matters with the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_720/2025: Dismissal of the appeal concerning family conflict situation
Summary of the facts
In a family conflict situation between A.________ and B.B.________ arising from a relationship between B.B.________ and a relative of A.________, there was a physical and verbal altercation. A.________ was found guilty by the first-instance court of assault, insults, and threats, and was sentenced to a fine and a penalty. The cantonal appellate court confirmed the first-instance judgment.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_1078/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning residence and place of debt enforcement
Summary of the facts
A.________ had previously registered his residence in Geneva but stated that he had moved to the Canton of Schwyz by 2020 at the latest and had since lived in various places in South America. Creditors B.________ and C.________ as well as the Geneva debt collection office conducted enforcement against him, during which service of the payment order repeatedly failed. Subsequently, public service was effected. The debt collection office relied on the fact that A.________ still resided in Geneva or at least that a fictional place of debt enforcement existed in Geneva.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_779/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning preventive detention to secure penal enforcement
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ was sentenced in Switzerland for simple bodily injury, rape, sexual coercion, and driving without a valid license to 44 months’ imprisonment and eight years’ expulsion from the country (judgment of the Bucheggberg-Wasseramt District Court of 21 March 2025). The Solothurn Cantonal Superior Court increased the prison sentence to 47 months on appeal and ordered preventive detention on the same day to secure penal enforcement. A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court requesting the annulment of the preventive detention.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_1070/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning personal contact rights and legal aid
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal against a decision of the president of the cantonal Child and Adult Protection Authority of the Canton of Valais of 14 November 2025, which dismissed his requests for a personal contact right with a child pursuant to Art. 274a CC and for legal aid for the cantonal proceedings. During the proceedings before the Federal Supreme Court, the appellant withdrew his appeal.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1279/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning conditional release from penal enforcement
Summary of the facts
The appellant, who was sentenced to twelve years’ imprisonment for multiple rapes and sexual acts with children, requested conditional release from penal enforcement. After the Office of Penal Enforcement refused the release, the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn dismissed an appeal. The appellant turned to the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_841/2025: Measures to protect the marital community: Allocation of the apartment, child support, and parental custody
Summary of the facts
The parties A.________ and B.________ are married and parents of three minor children. After multiple separations and resumptions of cohabitation, B.________ filed a request for measures to protect the marital community in December 2024. Disputes concerned in particular the allocation of the marital apartment, parental custody, and child support. The lower court dismissed A.________’s appeal regarding allocation of the apartment and parental custody, awarding the children to the mother. Adjustments were made with respect to maintenance.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_331/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning international legal assistance in criminal matters
Summary of the facts
The case concerns international legal assistance in criminal matters between Switzerland and Italy. The subject is the transfer of seized assets for confiscation. The Fondazione A.________ requested the annulment of a final decision of the Ministry of the Canton of Ticino and the issuance of a new formal appealable decision as well as participation in a parallel appeal procedure. The Federal Criminal Court dismissed their appeals and request on the grounds that the Fondazione only acted as creditor of the affected persons and could not demonstrate direct concern within the meaning of Art. 80h lit. b AIMP.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_450/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning withdrawal of the appeal related to an arrest objection
Summary of the facts
The appellant (C.________ AG) filed an appeal in civil matters against a judgment of the Zurich Cantonal Superior Court of 14 April 2026, which dismissed her appeal against an arrest objection. After the deadline for payment of the cost advance was extended, the appellant withdrew her appeal on 25 June 2026.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_945/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning expulsion and SIS alert
Summary of the facts
The Solothurn Cantonal Superior Court sentenced A.________ to 14 months imprisonment for several offenses (including theft, trespassing, and other traffic offenses) and ordered a six-year expulsion as well as its entry in the Schengen Information System (SIS). A.________ requested the Federal Supreme Court to annul the expulsion and SIS alert, primarily invoking a serious personal hardship under Art. 66a para. 2 SCC.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
6B_323/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning speeding violation
Summary of the facts
The appellant was fined CHF 400 by the Graubünden Cantonal Superior Court on appeal for a speeding violation committed within a built-up area. Before the Federal Supreme Court, she alleged that the Superior Court acted "ultra vires" and requested the judgment to be annulled, arguing that neither the named accused nor the alleged traffic offense existed.
The full summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.