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 with 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 individually tailored to your legal areas.
4A_196/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning definitive legal opening
Summary of the facts
By divorce judgment dated 7 March 2025, the appellant was ordered to pay a matrimonial property compensation payment and party costs to the respondent. After a payment order, the appellant filed an objection. The Cantonal Court of Glarus then granted the respondent definitive legal opening, and the appellant's appeal was dismissed by the Higher Court of Glarus. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court in which he questioned, among other things, the enforceability of the title.
Summary of the considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examines the admissibility of the appeal ex officio. The amount in dispute exceeds the required limit, and the appeal was filed in due time. The requirements for the reasoning of an appeal were explained. The appellant’s submissions partly did not meet these requirements. The claim is based on a final divorce judgment, which can only be reviewed by the legal opening judge to a limited extent. The appellant’s objections, claiming that access to Pillar 3a funds to satisfy the claim is impermissible, are substantive legal questions that cannot be examined in the legal opening procedure. The appellant’s submission that enforcement is not lawful due to the impermissibility of the payment modality relates to a question of the material correctness of the divorce judgment – something that is not subject to the legal opening procedure. The objection that the claim collection without specifying a target account is abusive was dismissed due to insufficient reasoning.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on the appellant without awarding party compensation.
1C_246/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning the forfeiture of the probationary driving license
Summary of the facts
The judgment deals with the forfeiture of the probationary driving license of a novice driver due to multiple speeding violations committed within short time intervals in a built-up area. It examines whether the forfeiture was lawful, particularly considering whether the first violation was known to the driver before committing the subsequent offenses.
Summary of the considerations
**E. 1:** The appellant may file an appeal in public-law matters against the contested decision, as it represents a final cantonal instance decision and meets the other requirements of Art. 89 para. 1 letters b and c BGG. **E. 2:** The appellant committed three serious traffic offenses (speeding within the locality). According to prevailing case law, a repeated medium or serious offense during the probationary period leads to the forfeiture of the probationary driving license (Art. 15a para. 4 SVG). It is irrelevant whether the first offense was sanctioned before the second or was known to the driver (E. 2.1). The appellant's speeding violations clearly exceed the thresholds for serious offenses (E. 2.2). The appellant's objections that he did not know about the first offense at the time of the second are neither legally nor factually relevant (E. 2.3). The lower court rightly assessed the offenses as indications of inadequate driving aptitude and justified the forfeiture of the license to ensure road safety (E. 2.4). **E. 3:** Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellant bears the procedural costs of CHF 3,000.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, the procedural costs were imposed on the appellant, and no party compensation was awarded.
5A_926/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning a recusal request in an inheritance proceeding
Summary of the facts
The dispute concerns the dismissal of a recusal request against the single judge of the District Court of Lugano, Division 4, related to a procedure for the division of an inheritance. The appellant (A.A.________), one of the heirs, had alleged bias against the responsible judge. In the lower instances, the recusal request was deemed inadmissible, particularly due to late submission. The appellant filed an appeal against the dismissal of the recusal request with the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the considerations
- (E.1) The Federal Supreme Court found that the appeal was filed in due time (Art. 100 para. 1 BGG), but only those complaints relating to the recusal can be examined. - (E.2) Core issues of the appeal are the right to be heard (Art. 53 para. 3 ZPO) and the timeliness of the recusal request (Art. 49 para. 1 ZPO). - (E.3) Regarding the right to be heard: The Federal Supreme Court confirmed that a violation of the right to be heard only leads to the annulment of the decision if it could affect the outcome of the procedure. The appellant could not plausibly demonstrate how the alleged violation influenced the judgment. - (E.4) Regarding the timeliness of the request: The court clarified that the appellant should have recognized the grounds for recusal at the latest with a judicial act of 18 February 2025. Her submission on 20 May 2025 was therefore late. The Federal Supreme Court saw no violation of federal law here, as timeliness is a fundamental procedural principle. - (E.5) The appeal to the European Convention on Human Rights (Art. 6 ECHR) was dismissed, as no excessive formalism was present.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, and the court costs of CHF 2,000 were imposed on the appellant.
8C_203/2026: Partial acceptance of the appeal concerning entitlement to a disability pension
Summary of the facts
The appellant, born in 1969, registered with the disability insurance office of the canton of Schaffhausen (IV office) to claim benefits due to various health complaints (mental illness, COPD, osteoarthritis). A multidisciplinary expert report (BEGAZ dated 5 February 2024) established a 70% work capacity. The IV office denied pension entitlement. The Higher Court of the canton of Schaffhausen dismissed her appeal. The appellant requested the Federal Supreme Court to refer the matter back for reassessment.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_376/2024: Non-admission of the appeal concerning security deposit and cost allocation in contamination remediation
Summary of the facts
A.________ AG and B.________ AG are involved in proceedings concerning the obligation to bear costs and perform real services for the remediation of contaminated sites in Dietikon. The CKW contamination results from the business activities of the two companies between 1940 and 1972. Until 1965, A.________ AG or its legal predecessor is classified as the cause of the conduct; from 1965, the machinery and equipment operations were transferred to B.________ AG, with the properties rented to it. Disputes exist regarding the distribution of remediation costs, assignment of real service obligations, and the order of a security deposit.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6F_12/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning a revision request
Summary of the facts
The petitioner filed a revision request against judgment 6B_212/2026 of the Federal Supreme Court, which was closed with a non-admission decision on 6 May 2026. The petitioner alleged that the Federal Supreme Court overlooked a burden situation caused by unsolicited mail deliveries and denied him the right to be heard.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_1424/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning asset freeze
Summary of the facts
E.________ and F.________, both officers of the now liquidated G.________ SA, are accused of abuse of trust (Art. 138 para. 1 no. 2 Swiss Criminal Code), fraud (Art. 146 SCC), embezzlement (Art. 158 para. 1 no. 1 SCC), and insolvency offenses (Arts. 163–167 SCC). A.________ SA and its subsidiaries B.________ Sàrl, C.________ AG, and D.________ AG became the target of an asset freeze (Art. 263 Swiss Criminal Procedure Code) during the proceedings.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_239/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning modification of divorce judgment on custody allocation
Summary of the facts
A.________ (father) and B.________ (mother) are divorced parents of child C.________. According to the divorce judgment (2016), the father was granted custody while the mother had visitation rights and maintenance obligations. This arrangement was amended by mutual agreement until the father was convicted in 2023 for theft and insults. The mother then requested modification of the divorce judgment. The District Court of Bülach transferred custody to the mother. The Higher Court of the canton of Zurich confirmed this decision and denied the father legal aid. The father appealed this decision to the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_144/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning value-added contribution
Summary of the facts
The proceedings concern the levying of a value-added contribution in connection with the rezoning of a property in the canton of Jura. The municipality of Les Breuleux acquired the relevant parcel from the previous owners. The canton conducted an assessment of the value increase, which was subject to a corresponding levy. The owners contested, among other things, their role as debtors of the levy and the valuation method applied.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_764/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning legal aid
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ was involved in an inheritance dispute and applied to the Cantonal Court of Fribourg for legal aid for an appeal. The Cantonal Court did not grant a request for a super-provisional injunction and rejected the legal aid request. It subsequently demanded a cost advance of CHF 120,000. The appellant appealed the refusal of legal aid to the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9F_5/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning health insurance
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a revision request on 23 February 2026 (postmark) against the Federal Supreme Court judgment of 4 February 2026, which had dismissed an appeal against a judgment of the Social Insurance Court of the canton of Zurich dated 23 September 2025. The revision request was supplemented by further submissions. The petitioner also requested legal aid.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_510/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning disability insurance benefits
Summary of the facts
The appellant, a Serbian national who entered Switzerland in 2017, claimed benefits from the disability insurance. The IV office of the canton of Zurich denied these claims by decision dated 13 May 2025. The Social Insurance Court of the canton of Zurich then dismissed the appellant’s appeal, relying in particular on a psychiatric expert report confirming a pension-specific disability that already existed upon entry. According to Art. 6 para. 2 ATSG, this excludes benefits under the IVG.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_671/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning recusal request against judge
Summary of the facts
The appellants A.A.________ and B.A.________ requested the recusal of the cantonal judge Céline Courbat before the cantonal instance. The cantonal appellate instance declared the recusal request inadmissible by decision dated 1 April 2026 because the judge concerned was no longer involved in the matter at the time of the request submission. Furthermore, there were no serious breaches of official duties or indications of bias. A.A.________ and B.A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court on 22 May 2026 and simultaneously requested legal aid.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_1425/2025: Acceptance of the appeal concerning asset freeze on real estate
Summary of the facts
The proceedings concern a criminal investigation against B.________ and C.________, officers of the now liquidated D.________ SA, on suspicion of breach of trust, fraud, embezzlement, and bankruptcy offenses. D.________ SA held 18.4% of the capital of A.________ SA, and B.________ was chairman of the board of A.________ SA from 2019 to 2024. On 10 September 2025, the Geneva public prosecutor ordered the criminal procedural asset freeze on real estate of A.________ SA in the canton of Basel-Stadt, among other things to secure a possible substitute claim (Art. 263 para. 1 lit. e StPO, Art. 71 para. 1 StGB). The lower court dismissed the appeal of A.________ SA against this asset freeze.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4F_22/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning restoration of a deadline
Summary of the facts
The petitioner (A.________) requested the Federal Supreme Court to restore a deadline pursuant to Art. 50 para. 1 BGG in connection with a previous judgment (proceeding 4A_40/2026), in which the Federal Supreme Court declared his appeal inadmissible due to non-payment of a cost advance. The petitioner claimed, among other things, that he was misinformed by the Federal Supreme Court's registry and argued that he relied on this information in good faith. He also applied for legal aid.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_362/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning modification of a marital protection order
Summary of the facts
The married parents A.________ and B.________ separated in 2023. The marital protection decision of the Civil District Court Basel-Landschaft East dated 14 February 2023 regulated separation, granting custody of the children to the mother. After the mother’s psychiatric hospitalization in July 2023, the father applied for modification of this decision. The modification decision confirmed custody allocation to the father and obliged the mother to pay child support. The mother’s appeal was not dealt with by the Cantonal Court Basel-Landschaft due to formal and substantive deficiencies in the appeal. The mother appealed this decision to the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_373/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning denial of justice regarding a voting complaint
Summary of the facts
On 14 June 2026, the popular initiative “No 10-million Switzerland [Sustainability Initiative]” was rejected. A.________ submitted a petition on 16 June 2026 to the government council of the canton of Zurich requesting, on behalf of the wild apple (Malus sylvestris), a repetition of the vote. The Directorate of Justice and the Interior of the canton of Zurich rejected this request because the wild apple was neither party- nor process-capable. A.________ then filed a denial of justice complaint with the Federal Supreme Court on 30 June 2026.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_157/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning authorization to prosecute for abuse of office
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint for abuse of office (Art. 312 SCC) against city councilor B.________ and department secretary C.________. He accuses them of abusing their sovereign powers to silence him in connection with the termination of his employment. The Chief Public Prosecutor's Office of the canton of Zurich recommended not granting authorization to prosecute. The Higher Court of the canton of Zurich then refused authorization on 12 February 2026. A.________ appealed this decision to the Federal Supreme Court.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1F_1/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning revision of a Federal Supreme Court judgment
Summary of the facts
A.________ applied for revision of a Federal Supreme Court judgment of 2 July 2025, which had dismissed an appeal against the reclassification of his parcels into a cantonal reserve zone. According to cantonal findings, the parcels are part of a significantly oversized building zone. In the revision, A.________ relies on newly discovered documents which, in his opinion, relativize the conclusions about the surplus. However, the Federal Supreme Court finds that these documents do not qualify as “false new evidence” and are therefore not revisable.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_89/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning jurisdiction of the Higher Court of the canton of Schaffhausen
Summary of the facts
A.________, an insured person residing in the canton of Schaffhausen, was retroactively reduced by the IV office Schaffhausen from a half pension to a quarter pension. Additionally, the excessively received benefits were subject to reimbursement. An unclear division of jurisdiction between the IV office Schaffhausen, the SVA Zurich, and the compensation fund Zurich led to numerous letters and decisions. Finally, the Higher Court of the canton of Schaffhausen dismissed the appeal on 19 December 2025 due to alleged local lack of jurisdiction. The insured then turned to the Federal Supreme Court and requested that the Higher Court admit the appeal.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_381/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning property transfer and tax-neutral restructuring
Summary of the facts
The case concerns whether a property transfer in connection with a wealth transfer agreement qualifies as a tax-neutral restructuring under Art. 24 para. 3 lit. b of the Tax Harmonization Act (StHG) and is therefore exempt from property gains tax. Specifically, it concerns the transfer of two parcels from B.________ AG to E.________ AG in 2014. The tax administration of the canton of Vaud imposed a mutation tax of CHF 742,500 on the transaction. The plaintiff disputed the tax liability, arguing that a tax-exempt restructuring was present.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5D_20/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning legal aid
Summary of the facts
The regional child protection authority Mendrisio lifted a guardianship for representation on behalf of two minor children on 11 March 2026 and imposed the costs of the measure (CHF 5,338.80) on the father A.A.________. On 4 May 2026, he filed an appeal against the cost allocation and simultaneously requested legal aid. The president of the child protection chamber of the appellate court of the canton of Ticino demanded a cost advance (CHF 500) referring to a possible inadmissibility of the appeal if not paid. On 12 May 2026, he dismissed the legal aid request without justification and upheld the advance. A.A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court on 26 May 2026.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_436/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning cost advance in social security matter
Summary of the facts
The appellant, A.________, filed an appeal against a decision of objection by the compensation fund of the canton of Zurich concerning damages for lost contributions. The locally competent Cantonal Court of Lucerne demanded a cost advance in installments. After late payment of the first installment, the Cantonal Court did not admit the appeal. The appellant requested the Federal Supreme Court to annul this decision and refer the matter back for substantive examination.
The full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.