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 in each case. The full summaries of all judgments are available on the Lexplorer portal. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your areas of law.
7B_806/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning insufficient reasoning
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint against B.________ on 5 July 2024 and later supplemented it with further allegations, including fraud, extortion, threats, obstruction of justice, and false accusation. The criminal proceedings were discontinued by the public prosecutor of the Canton of Ticino on 3 April 2025. The appeal lodged by A.________ against this was dismissed by the Criminal Complaints Court of the Cantonal Court of Ticino on 13 May 2026, with the procedural costs imposed on A.________. A.________ filed a criminal appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against this decision and requested that the case be remanded for renewed instruction.
Summary of the considerations
The Federal Supreme Court ex officio examines whether and to what extent an appeal is admissible. According to Art. 42 paras. 1 and 2 BGG, the appeal must contain reasoning explaining how the contested decision violates the law. These requirements also apply to legal laypersons. A.________ has not fulfilled these reasoning requirements. A.________ does not sufficiently engage with the arguments in the contested decision. Her submissions regarding the alleged violation of the principle "in dubio pro duriore", arbitrariness, and Art. 319 CPC remain purely appellate and do not meet the requirements of Art. 106 para. 2 BGG. The complaint of a violation of Art. 29a BV is also insufficiently reasoned. Given the deficient reasoning, it is unnecessary to examine the possible question of standing under Art. 81 para. 1 lit. b no. 5 BGG. Since the appeal is manifestly insufficiently reasoned, it is declared inadmissible in summary proceedings according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG. The request for legal aid is rejected due to lack of prospects of success, irrespective of the appellant’s financial situation. The court costs of 500 Swiss francs are imposed on A.________.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal is declared inadmissible and the request for legal aid is rejected. A.________ must bear the court costs.
6B_751/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning party status and embezzlement
Summary of the facts
The appellant was convicted in two cantonal instances of embezzlement under Art. 138 no. 1 para. 1 SCC to a prison sentence of 15 months with a probation period of three years. He is accused of having, as a member of the board with sole signing authority of a company, unlawfully handed over a diamond of considerable value entrusted to him under a deposit agreement to a third party, causing damage to the owner of the diamond. The proceedings also address the party status of an heir of the injured original owner.
Summary of the considerations
- E.1: The appellant challenged the party status of the heir of the victim and errors in fact-finding, especially regarding the status as heir. The Federal Supreme Court confirmed the decision of the lower court that the son of the deceased may legitimately act as a private plaintiff (Art. 121 para. 1 CPC), even if the succession is not fully clarified. For the criminal procedural context, the definition of "close persons" is relevant, not the substantive succession under foreign law. - E.2: The appellant alleged lack of sufficient objective and subjective elements of embezzlement. The Federal Supreme Court held that the lower court correctly established both the objective unlawfulness of the act and the subjective intent to enrich. - E.3: The appellant asserted a violation of the right to speedy proceedings (Art. 5 para. 1 CPC, Art. 29 para. 1 BV) and criticized the sentencing. The Federal Supreme Court stated that the lower court had already taken into account a violation of the right to speedy proceedings but criticized the lack of reasoning regarding the effects of the procedural delay on sentencing. For clarification, the decision was remanded to the lower court.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal is partially granted, the decision is overturned, and the matter is remanded to the lower court for a new decision. Court costs are imposed on the appellant.
6B_868/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning expulsion from the country
Summary of the facts
The respondent, a Portuguese national, was sentenced by the District Court of Winterthur inter alia for a qualified violation of the Narcotics Act (BetmG) to a prison sentence of 12 months and expulsion from the country for five years. The Cantonal Court of Zurich revoked the expulsion in its appellate decision and granted conditional execution of the prison sentence with a probation period of four years.
Summary of the considerations
The appellant, the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Canton of Zurich, challenges the waiver of the mandatory expulsion and argues that no serious personal hardship exists and that public interests prevail. The lower court affirmed a serious personal hardship (Art. 66a para. 2 SCC) due to the long duration of residence (20 years in Switzerland) and the respondent’s intact family life. The Federal Supreme Court finds that the requirements for expulsion under Art. 66a para. 1 lit. o SCC are basically met but emphasizes that the hardship clause must be applied restrictively. The private interests of the respondent include his long-term residence in Switzerland, a steady employment, and an intact family life with his wife and five-year-old daughter, both Swiss nationals. However, public interests prevail due to the seriousness of the offense (qualified violation of the Narcotics Act) and multiple prior convictions indicating a high risk of recidivism. The accompaniment of the respondent to Portugal by his family is reasonable, especially regarding reintegration prospects and regulation of family life. The Federal Supreme Court concludes that the lower court violated federal law by not ordering the expulsion.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal is granted and the decision of the lower court is overturned; the matter is remanded for a new assessment. No court costs are charged and legal aid is granted.
7B_663/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning procedural complaint and cost coverage
Summary of the facts
A.________ was sentenced by the Neuchâtel criminal court by penal order of 20 January 2026 to a prison sentence of 120 days and a fine of 10 daily rates. During the subsequent criminal proceedings, he requested among other things a "provision procédurale" (advance on procedural costs) and challenged various procedural acts. This included a demand for the recusal of the presiding judge. His request was rejected by the cantonal authority. A.________ filed an appeal against this decision with the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_310/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning official legal counsel
Summary of the facts
A.________ was accused of involvement in violent riots related to a football match. A criminal investigation was opened against him and a penal order was issued (conditional prison sentence of four months, fine of CHF 1,000, DNA and biometric data collection). He requested official legal counsel, which was refused both by the investigation office and the indictment chamber. Subsequently, A.________ applied to the Federal Supreme Court for the annulment of the decision of the indictment chamber and for the granting of official legal counsel.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_84/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning authorization to prosecute a police officer
Summary of the facts
The Migration Office of the Canton of Zurich commissioned the Cantonal Police with the delivery of C.________. During control measures, police officer B.________ conducted domicile checks. A.________, the partner of C.________, filmed one of the controls. B.________ filed a complaint against A.________ for violation of the general police regulations, but the municipal judge’s office did not open an investigation. Subsequently, A.________ accused B.________ of abuse of office and false accusation and requested a criminal investigation. The Cantonal Court of Zurich refused authorization to prosecute.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_722/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning revision of judgments
Summary of the facts
The appellant requested the revision of numerous judgments at the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen, claiming that the state had kidnapped and murdered his (deceased) mother by establishing a contact ban. The Cantonal Court dismissed the revision request insofar as it was admitted. The appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court alleging violations of constitutional rights.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5F_34/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning challenge for bias
Summary of the facts
A.________ repeatedly filed challenges for bias against the Family Court Muri. After a further challenge for bias, the Cantonal Court of Aargau rejected this on 15 June 2026, insofar as it was admitted. The Federal Supreme Court did not admit the appeal against this decision due to insufficient reasoning in judgment 5A_619/2026 of 7 July 2026. By submission of 20 July 2026, A.________ requested in the alternative the revision of this judgment.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6B_457/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning money laundering and prison sentence
Summary of the facts
The appellant was sentenced by first instance for qualified violation of the Narcotics Act (LStup) and repeated, partly attempted money laundering to a prison sentence of 8 years and 6 months and expulsion from the country for 12 years. He appealed this judgment, which was dismissed by the appellate court (CARP). Before the Federal Supreme Court, the appellant requested acquittal regarding money laundering as well as a reduction of the prison sentence to 5 years and 6 months.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9F_13/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning revision of a Federal Supreme Court judgment
Summary of the facts
The applicant requested revision of Federal Supreme Court judgment 9C_719/2025 on 4 May 2026. The Federal Supreme Court informed the applicant of the obligation to pay a cost advance and set a deadline until 29 June 2026. The consequences of non-payment were indicated. The applicant did not pay the cost advance and also did not apply for legal aid.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5D_30/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning use of the marital property in marriage protection proceedings
Summary of the facts
The parties disputed the use of the marital property in marriage protection proceedings before the District Court Pfäffikon. On 8 September 2025, a court-approved settlement was concluded, which obliged the appellant to leave the marital property. After the appellant failed to comply, the municipal office was commissioned by the District Court Pfäffikon to enforce this by compulsion. The Cantonal Court of Zurich dismissed the appeal against this decision. The appellant then turned to the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_401/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning mutual legal assistance request by the Maltese authorities
Summary of the facts
The proceedings concern a mutual legal assistance request of the Maltese authorities dated 10 September 2025 in connection with investigations against former Maltese government members for money laundering, corruption, and embezzlement. Documents related to a bank account of a Swiss company (A.________) as well as tax documents were requested. The Federal Criminal Court approved the transmission of these documents, after which the affected company filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6B_1012/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning property damage and trespassing
Summary of the facts
A.________ was sentenced by the Regional Court Bern-Mittelland for multiple and partly qualified property damage, trespassing, disobedience to official orders as well as multiple violations of the Passenger Transport Act to twelve months imprisonment, an administrative fine, and an inpatient therapeutic measure. The Cantonal Court of Bern increased the prison sentence to 18 months and confirmed the inpatient measure and the administrative fine. A.________ appealed this judgment to the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_181/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning challenge to termination of tenancy
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ was tenant of three apartments that were sublet. The new landlord, B.________ AG, terminated the leases on 16 January 2025. The appellant sent the conciliation authority for tenancy and lease disputes a registered letter on 5 February 2025, the content of which is disputed. The conciliation authority assumed that only the challenge to termination regarding one apartment was contained and refused to conduct conciliation negotiations for apartments xxx and zzz. An appeal against this refusal was dismissed by the Cantonal Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_530/2024: Non-admission of the appeal concerning rent increases
Summary of the facts
This concerns a dispute over rent increases pursuant to Arts. 269d and 270b CO. A rent increase notified in 2009 by the then owner of the properties was contested by the tenants. During the lengthy proceedings, ownership of the properties changed, and so did the landlord. The case was heard before various instances, particularly concerning an alleged violation of mandatory conciliation and the objection of statute of limitations regarding the demanded back payments.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_912/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning extension of detention
Summary of the facts
A.________ is prosecuted by the public prosecutor’s office Kreuzlingen inter alia for threats against his ex-wife. He has been in pre-trial detention since 23 December 2025. The coercive measures court Thurgau extended this detention until 20 July 2026. An appeal against this decision to the Cantonal Court of Thurgau was dismissed insofar as it was admitted. A.________ then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court demanding his immediate release from detention.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_807/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning objection due to lateness
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court on 19 June 2026 against a decision of the Appellate Court of Basel-Stadt (single judge) of 9 June 2026 concerning non-admission of an objection due to lateness. By submission of 17 July 2026, the appellant withdrew his appeal.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_79/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning international sports arbitration
Summary of the facts
This case concerns a score judge in rhythmic gymnastics who was accused of manipulating scores at the 2024 European Championships, thereby favoring a particular gymnast. The disciplinary commission of the Gymnastics Ethics Foundation imposed a four-year ban and revoked the score judge license. The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) confirmed the sanctions. The appellant contested the CAS award before the Federal Supreme Court due to alleged violations of the right to be heard and the formal public order.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_735/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning cost imposition for missed examinations
Summary of the facts
The appellant, born in 1969, submitted an application for disability insurance benefits on 10 September 2023. Due to multiple no-shows at multidisciplinary assessment appointments and after unsuccessful reminder and reflection periods, the IV office of the Canton of Thurgau rejected the application on 3 June 2025. At the same time, it imposed costs for the missed examinations on the appellant in the amount of 4,500 Swiss francs. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Thurgau dismissed the subsequent appeal. The appellant requested in proceedings before the Federal Supreme Court that the cost imposition be lifted.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.