Latest Federal Supreme Court Judgments
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Supreme Court (FSCS) 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 each time. 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.
7F_27/2026: Non-admission of the appeal regarding the application for revision
Summary of the facts
The applicant A.________ filed an application for revision to revise the Federal Supreme Court judgment 7B_1102/2025, 7B_1131/2025 of January 21, 2026. The original judgment was a decision of non-admission because the appeals did not meet the statutory requirements for reasoning. The applicant claimed health problems and requested, among other things, the reinstatement of the deadline pursuant to Art. 50 FSC.
Summary of the considerations
- E.1: The judgment 7B_1102/2025, 7B_1131/2025 was a non-admission decision by the Federal Supreme Court because the appeals were insufficiently reasoned (Art. 42 para. 2 FSC) and the applicant had not raised formal objections. - E.2 - E.4: The application for revision dated April 30, 2026 was late (deadline under Art. 124 para. 1 lit. b FSC expired; receipt should have been by April 14, 2026). The claimed ground for revision was not substantiated. - E.6: The request for reinstatement of the deadline under Art. 50 FSC was examined. The applicant did not provide convincing evidence of an involuntary obstacle that prevented timely submission. In particular, despite illness, he was able to make other submissions to the Federal Supreme Court during the deadline period. - E.7: The request for legal aid was rejected due to lack of prospects of success (Art. 64 para. 1 FSC). - E.8: The court costs were determined taking into account the applicant’s financial situation.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court rejected the application for revision and also dismissed the requests for reinstatement of the deadline and for legal aid. The court costs were imposed on the applicant.
9C_632/2024: Non-admission of the appeal concerning ordinary assessment for tax periods 2015 and 2019
Summary of the facts
The appellant, holder of a residence permit B, was taxed at source for the tax periods 2015 and 2019. Subsequent tax audits revealed that the tax returns for the years 2009–2018 may have been incomplete or incorrect. The cantonal tax administration initiated proceedings leading to retroactive tax assessments and fines. The dispute concerned whether the appellant was entitled to ordinary assessments for the tax periods 2015 and 2019.
Summary of the considerations
- E.1: The Federal Supreme Court considers the appeal admissible regarding the question of ordinary assessment for the tax periods 2015 and 2019, since the lower court decided as the last cantonal instance. - E.2: The application of law is ex officio; the Federal Supreme Court generally relies on the findings of the lower court unless obvious errors or arbitrary deviations are present. - E.3: In connection with tax law, the federal provisions on withholding tax, including Art. 137 and 138 in conjunction with Art. 90 para. 2 aLIFD, were thoroughly examined. Ordinary assessment must be carried out by the tax administration for both the 2015 and 2019 tax periods. - E.4: Regarding cantonal tax law (Geneva), it was found that for years in which income was below the threshold according to cantonal law, ordinary assessment did not automatically occur. Nevertheless, harmonization with the constitutional principle of taxation according to economic capacity must be ensured here as well. - E.6: For the 2015 and 2019 tax periods, taxable gross income and any deductible expenses (medical costs) had to be considered. The previous dismissal of the claim for ordinary assessment was therefore not lawful. - E.7: The tax administration is obliged to carry out the assessments properly and take all relevant elements and deductions into account. An ordinary assessment for both affected tax years must be made.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court upheld the appeal both with regard to federal tax law and cantonal and municipal taxes. It overturned the judgment of the lower court and remanded the matter for a new decision.
1C_751/2025: Partial granting of the appeal concerning building permits
Summary of the facts
The Küsnacht building commission granted a builder building permits for the construction of a new multi-family house with underground parking, including various project changes. Opponents of these permits repeatedly filed appeals, particularly against changes to the access road and other conditions. While lower courts assessed various aspects and ordered partial changes, the appellants and the builder in several cases appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the considerations
- E.1: The Federal Supreme Court examined its jurisdiction, the substantive prerequisites, and the final decision under Art. 90 FSC. It affirmed its fundamental jurisdiction and the parties’ standing. - E.3: The Federal Supreme Court found that the lower court wrongly did not admit objections concerning the gradient of the access ramp, although the changes (including elevation) due to project modifications should have been newly examined. The previous dismissal of these objections was considered arbitrary. - E.4-5: Objections regarding the alleged disregard of the traffic master plan and the municipal council resolution were rejected for lack of sufficient reasoning. Master plans are binding only for authorities; the appellants’ argumentation was not sufficiently concrete. - E.6: The appellants raised objections against the cost allocation of the building appeal proceedings. The Federal Supreme Court found the cost allocation of the lower court proportionate and not arbitrary in view of the course of the proceedings.
Summary of the dispositive
The judgment of the lower court was partially overturned and remanded for a new assessment regarding the access gradient. Further objections were dismissed, and court costs were allocated proportionally.
2C_381/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning late submission
Summary of the facts
A Mexican national (A.________) was unable to pick up her cat, which was housed in an animal shelter and later adopted, in time due to personal circumstances (including a several-month hospital stay due to domestic violence). The cantonal veterinary authority issued an order to find a new home for the animal. After the cat was adopted by a new family, the cantonal court declared an appeal against this decision inadmissible, citing civil jurisdiction and recognizing a violation of the suspensive effect of the appeal. The affected person then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
7F_37/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning revision of a non-admission decision
Summary of the facts
The applicant, A.A.________, requested revision of the Federal Supreme Court’s non-admission decision 7B_409/2026 of May 11, 2026. He argued that the Federal Supreme Court had not considered essential facts from the files in its earlier decision and regarded his original revision request as incorrectly assessed.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
6B_191/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning violence or threats against authorities and officials
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ was convicted inter alia for violence or threats against authorities and officials (Art. 285 para. 1 SCC) as well as insult. He allegedly repeatedly made threats, insults, and disturbing behavior towards several professional assistants over several years. The lower courts considered the acts, including death threats and intimidation, to be capable of significantly hindering the affected assistants in the exercise of their duties. The appellant claimed he was not or only partially culpable, supported among other things by psychiatric problems.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
6B_878/2024: Non-admission of the appeal concerning fraud and mismanagement
Summary of the facts
A.________, B.________ and C.________, former board members of the now bankrupt F.________ SA, were convicted of mismanagement under Art. 165 SCC because they violated their duties dealing with the company’s over-indebtedness. D.________ and E.________ had also filed charges for fraud (Art. 146 SCC) as they were allegedly induced to make misleading statements about loans to the company. The fraud criminal charge was however previously definitively discontinued.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
9C_349/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning inadmissible submission
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against a decision of the Cour de justice of the canton of Geneva, which declared her submission inadmissible because the possibility of objection to the cantonal compensation office still existed. The lower court forwarded the letter to the responsible office and did not charge procedural costs.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
8C_710/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning accident causality
Summary of the facts
A.________ reported in 2023 new complaints related to a rear-end collision in 1996, in which he suffered a mild cervical spine sprain, and claimed benefits from the Swiss National Accident Insurance Fund (Suva). After medical assessment, Suva denied the causality of the complaints with the accident. The lower court dismissed the appeal against this decision.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
5A_659/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning restoration of suspensive effect
Summary of the facts
A.________ and B.________, parents of three minor children, opposed a guardianship ordered by the family court under Art. 308 paras. 1 and 2 ZGB and social-pedagogical family support under Art. 307 para. 1 ZGB. They requested restoration of the withdrawn suspensive effect and consideration of additional reports. The cantonal court of Aargau rejected the request for restoration of suspensive effect. The parents appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
2C_195/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning recognition of an agricultural business
Summary of the facts
A.A.________, a farmer, applied for a declaratory order to obtain legal recognition of his operation as an agricultural business. This was related to an inheritance dispute in which he asserted a claim to the allocation share of an agricultural property. The cantonal instances refused recognition on the grounds that his own land area was below the cantonal minimum requirement of 4 hectares.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
5A_669/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning extension of deadline in marriage protection proceedings
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ and the respondent B.________ conduct marriage protection proceedings before the Pfäffikon district court concerning their daughter born in 2023. The appellant agreed to an assessment of her parenting capacity. After the expert report was prepared and supplementary questions submitted, the district court rejected the appellant’s request for an extension of the deadline. The appellant appealed to the cantonal court of Zurich, which did not admit the appeal. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
7B_8/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning execution in the form of electronic monitoring
Summary of the facts
A.________ was convicted for neglecting maintenance obligations to a ten-month custodial sentence (September 4, 2024). His request to serve the sentence via electronic monitoring was denied by the cantonal authorities of the canton of Bern. These decisions were first confirmed by the Bern Security Directorate (August 18, 2025) and later by the Bern cantonal court (December 1, 2025). A.________ filed a criminal appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, requesting annulment of the lower court’s decision and granting of electronic monitoring.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
1C_337/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning driver’s license revocation due to serious traffic offense
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ was revoked his driver’s license for six months by the Road Traffic Office of the canton of Zug because he committed a serious traffic violation on February 6, 2021. The revocation was based on Art. 16c para. 1 lit. d SVG in conjunction with Art. 16c para. 2 lit. b SVG, since a moderate offense with license revocation was registered within five years prior to this serious offense. The administrative court of the canton of Zug confirmed the decision, prompting A.________ to file an appeal in public law matters.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
5A_605/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning public auction of inheritance properties
Summary of the facts
The appellant, daughter and compulsory heir of the deceased testator B.________ (deceased since 2009), sought to prevent the public auction of inheritance properties whose liquidation was ordered by the Thurgau cantonal court in 2025. The share of a co-heir in the proceeds had been previously seized, with the appellant herself being a creditor. The appellant appealed through the Kreuzlingen district court and the Thurgau cantonal court and finally to the Federal Supreme Court, which dealt with the matter due to the obvious groundlessness and lateness of the submissions.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
8C_731/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning claim for insolvency compensation
Summary of the facts
The proceedings concern the claim of A.________ for insolvency compensation for the period from June 1, 2023 to August 18, 2023, after the bankruptcy administration of company B.________ was opened. The lower courts dismissed the claim because insolvency compensation is based only on actual work performed. A.________ last worked on November 30, 2022 and has since been exempt from work duty.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
9C_296/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning tax recognition of warranty provisions
Summary of the facts
The tax administration of the canton of Bern refused to recognize a provision of CHF 7,000,000 by A.________ AG for warranty services related to a construction project (tax period 2016) and added the amount to taxable profit. After the cantonal instances confirmed this position, A.________ AG applied to the Federal Supreme Court for annulment of the judgment of the Bern Administrative Court, arguing that the provision was commercially justified. The dispute concerns in particular whether the likelihood of an outflow of funds was sufficiently and correctly assessed.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
5A_674/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning vexatious submission
Summary of the facts
The Bremgarten and Surroundings Debt Collection Office published payment orders against the appellant on April 27, 2026. The appellant approached the Bremgarten district court on May 7, 2026, which classified his submission as vexatious and returned it without consideration. An appeal against this decision was dismissed by the Aargau cantonal court on June 12, 2026, and a fine was imposed. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court on July 13, 2026.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.
6B_910/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning murder accusation and culpability
Summary of the facts
A.________ was convicted by the criminal court of the canton of Geneva of murder (Art. 111 SCC), serious violation of fundamental traffic rules (Art. 90 para. 3 SVG), driving despite incapacity and driving under the influence of alcohol (Art. 91 para. 2 lit. a SVG) to six years and six months of imprisonment and a ten-year expulsion order. In addition, A.________ was ordered to pay damages and compensation to the victim’s relatives. The appellate court of the canton of Geneva requalified the act legally, convicted A.________ instead of murder for negligent homicide (Art. 117 SCC), reduced the sentence to three years imprisonment, of which 18 months were suspended, and reduced the compensation amount. The expulsion order was lifted. The public prosecutor and the victim’s relatives filed an appeal against this judgment with the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment is available in the portal.