Latest Judgments of the Federal Supreme Court
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 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_319/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning free legal aid in the divorce judgment
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ applied for free legal aid and representation in the appeal procedure against a divorce judgment at the Cantonal Court of Fribourg, which was rejected. This decision was challenged before the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1:** The appeal is directed against an independently opened interlocutory decision of a final cantonal instance. An appeal in civil matters is admissible here without a dispute value requirement. - **E.2:** The Federal Supreme Court applies the law ex officio but reviews only sufficiently substantiated complaints (Art. 42 para. 2 BGG) and generally incorporates the lower court’s factual findings bindingly, unless their obvious incorrectness is demonstrated. - **E.3:** On free legal aid pursuant to Art. 117 CPC: There are strict requirements for demonstrating indigence. The lower court concluded, due to insufficient evidence, that the appellant was not indigent. - **E.3.1–E.3.3:** The appellant made general assertions and submitted no documents evidencing her financial situation. It was found that she failed to comply with her duty to cooperate. - **E.3.4:** The Federal Supreme Court holds that the lower court did not violate federal law in rejecting the request for lack of proof of indigence.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, and the request for free legal aid was also rejected. No court fees were imposed.
8C_504/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning insurance benefits
Summary of the facts
A.________ appealed to the Federal Supreme Court against a decision of the Insurance Court of the Canton Ticino dated 15.06.2026. The cantonal court dismissed A.________’s appeal against a decision adjustment by Baloise Assicurazione SA from 15.12.2025, which denied him insurance benefits. A.________ was classified as self-employed since he acted economically and legally as the sole owner and director of his company, which was practically inactive.
Summary of the considerations
- **E. 1.1:** The Insurance Court of the Canton Ticino found that there was an economic identity between A.________ and the company he controlled, as since 2019 he fully financed his salary himself and the company showed hardly any turnover or activity. - **E. 2:** According to Art. 95 BGG, a violation of federal law may be asserted. The Federal Supreme Court examines factual complaints only if their defect could be decisive for the outcome of the proceedings and the complaints are clearly reasoned. Formally inadequately reasoned appeals are inadmissible. - **E. 3:** A.________ submitted no substantiated objections to the prior decision, did not assert any concrete legal violation, and did not engage with the reasoning of the lower court. - **E. 4:** Due to the obvious formal defects of the appeal, the Federal Supreme Court declared it inadmissible.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was declared inadmissible, and no court fees were charged.
2C_463/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning international administrative assistance in tax matters
Summary of the facts
The Israeli tax authority requested administrative assistance from the Swiss Federal Tax Administration (ESTV) on 3 May 2021 based on the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (MAC). The request concerned a bank client in Israel and 13 other persons involved in the banking relationship. The ESTV granted administrative assistance, which was challenged by the affected persons before the Federal Administrative Court. The Federal Administrative Court dismissed the appeal. The affected persons then brought an appeal in public law matters before the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examines its jurisdiction and the admissibility requirements ex officio. Appeal decisions in the field of international administrative assistance in tax matters are admissible under certain conditions pursuant to Art. 84a BGG. The existence of a legal question of fundamental importance is affirmed only if such questions have considerable practical impact or require supreme court clarification. The legal question raised concerns the restriction of the right of access to files due to redacted facts in the administrative assistance request. The Federal Supreme Court refers to the requirements of Art. 28 VwVG and Art. 15 para. 2 StAhiG, which ensure that the affected person knows the essential content despite restricted file access. The Court confirms that the criteria applied by the lower court are met. There is no legal question of fundamental importance as the issue concerns solely the application of law in the individual case.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court did not take up the appeal and imposed the court costs on the appellants. No party compensation was awarded.
8C_721/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning claim to disability pension and integrity compensation
Summary of the facts
A self-employed cleaning specialist (A.________) was voluntarily insured against accident consequences with Suva. After a fall on stairs, he suffered a fracture of the right ankle. At the end of February 2025, Suva stopped daily allowance and medical cost payments, denied a claim to disability pension, but granted an integrity compensation due to a 15% health integrity loss. The Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich confirmed this decision. With an appeal to the Federal Supreme Court, continued payment of daily allowances and benefits or the award of a disability pension and increased integrity compensation was sought.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_191/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning authorization to prosecute doctors
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ filed several criminal complaints against three doctors at the Psychiatry St. Gallen, Outpatient Clinic Rorschach, for various alleged offenses related to his medical treatment. The indictment chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen refused authorization to prosecute. A.________ filed an appeal in public law matters to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_216/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning advance payment of costs and security obligations
Summary of the facts
This appeal concerns the question of exemption from advance payment of costs and security obligations in an appeal procedure before the Higher Court of the Canton of Zug. The appellant, defendant in an inheritance procedure, claimed that due to attachment proceedings she had no access to her accounts and applied for free legal aid and exemption from the advance payment obligation. The Higher Court rejected the request and obliged the defendant to pay an advance on costs and to secure any possible party compensation. The Federal Supreme Court reviewed the appeal against this interlocutory decision.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_828/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning suspensive effect in enforcement proceedings
Summary of the facts
The appellant challenged a decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Bern, which partially granted and partially rejected his request for suspensive effect regarding enforcement proceedings. The appellant filed an extensive appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, in which he claimed, among other things, an irreparable disadvantage.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_827/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning protective custody
Summary of the facts
The appellant was placed in protective custody by the Child and Adult Protection Authority (KESB) Olten-Gösgen on 14 July 2026. Her appeal against this decision was rejected by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn on 4 August 2026. On 25 August 2026, she filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_297/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning a father's personal contact with his children
Summary of the facts
The Federal Supreme Court had to rule on a case concerning a father's right to personal contact with his children. The father and mother, who are unmarried, share parental custody of two children. After reports from the Child and Adult Protection Authority (KESB) and conflicts between the parents, a cantonal court decided to limit the father's personal contact to meetings within a "contact point." The father requested the restoration of free personal contact.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_811/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning dismissal of a guardian in child and adult protection
Summary of the facts
The appellant is under assisted guardianship pursuant to Art. 393 ZGB, supplemented by a representative guardianship with income and asset administration. Several applications by the appellant for dismissal of the guardian were last rejected by the KESB Oberland West by decision of 26 June 2026. The Higher Court of the Canton of Bern did not take up the appeal against this decision on 11 August 2026 due to insufficient reasoning. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court on 20 August 2026.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_36/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning free legal aid and official defender
Summary of the facts
On 10 December 2025, the 2nd Criminal Chamber of the Higher Court of the Canton of Bern dismissed an appeal by A.________ against decisions of the Security Directorate of the Canton of Bern dated 5 September 2025 and the Probation and Penal System Department of the Canton of Bern dated 2 June 2025. These had denied free legal aid and appointment of an official defender in connection with a procedure to review conditional release from a measure and its conversion into a therapeutic measure. On 8 January 2026, A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4F_26/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning a revision request
Summary of the facts
The applicant, A.________, filed a revision request against a judgment of the Federal Supreme Court (4A_166/2026 of 21 May 2026). The lower court, the Higher Court of the Canton of Zug (II. Civil Division Single Judge), had on 10 April 2026 dismissed the applicant's request for free legal aid in a precautionary measure procedure. This decision was confirmed by the Federal Supreme Court. The applicant invoked several grounds for revision pursuant to Art. 121 ff. BGG, including the allegation that the Federal Supreme Court had overlooked significant facts. Additionally, a request for free legal aid for the revision proceedings was made.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_750/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning a recusal request
Summary of the facts
The appellant requested the civil court of the district of East Vaud to recuse President Nicolas Monod in a proceeding. This was based on an alleged violation of the right to be heard. The recusal request was rejected by the district court, and the cantonal administrative jurisdiction confirmed this decision. The appellant filed an appeal against this decision with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_962/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning procedural order
Summary of the facts
The lower court was of the opinion that the contested order is an interlocutory decision that can only be challenged in case of an irreparable disadvantage. However, the appellant did not present sufficient arguments proving such a disadvantage.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_1055/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning free legal aid
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a criminal appeal against a decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Thurgau, which rejected an application for free legal aid.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_659/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning cost transfer in a domestic dispute
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ was accused in a domestic dispute of having caused his wife a perforated eardrum. After a police investigation, the criminal investigation was discontinued due to lack of a criminal complaint. However, the appellant was ordered to bear the costs of the proceedings amounting to CHF 1,236, and a requested compensation was denied. The cantonal appellate authority confirmed this decision, and the Federal Supreme Court dealt with an appeal against this view.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_338/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning helplessness allowance
Summary of the facts
A.________, born 1968, repeatedly applied for disability insurance benefits since 2005. A full disability pension was granted to him in 2019. On 30.11.2020, he filed a renewed application for a helplessness allowance based on a medical certificate. The cantonal disability insurance office rejected the application on 28.08.2024, which the cantonal authority confirmed by decision on 08.05.2025.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_471/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning disability pension and integrity compensation
Summary of the facts
The appellant, formerly a flat roof insulator, suffered an anterior cruciate ligament rupture in his right knee in 2018. After surgeries and rehabilitation, complaints remained. Suva granted him a disability pension from May 2021 at a degree of 14%, later increased to 15%, and denied an integrity compensation. The Social Insurance Court Basel-Stadt referred the case back for further investigation in 2022, after which Suva set the disability pension at 19% in 2024. The appellant requested an 80% pension and integrity compensation before the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_900/2025: Partial granting of the appeal concerning initiation of proceedings and free legal aid
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ filed a criminal complaint in April 2024 for simple bodily harm, insult, and threat against B.________. She also requested free legal aid. The incident occurred at a private party, where the appellant claimed to have been hit and threatened by B.________. The competent public prosecutor's office of the Canton of Geneva waived prosecution based on Art. 310 para. 1 lit. a StPO and also denied free legal aid. The lower court dismissed the appeal against this decision, after which the appellant filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_378/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning free legal aid
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ applied for free legal aid in the context of criminal proceedings. The lower court rejected this application on the grounds that the legal requirements for free legal aid pursuant to Art. 136 StPO and Art. 29 para. 3 BV were not met. A._______ then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_342/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning unemployment compensation
Summary of the facts
The appellant, A.________, applied for unemployment compensation after being dismissed by B.________ SA, while the unemployment fund Unia denied the claim. The reason was that the appellant's husband held a position as chairman of the board of directors of the former employer, equivalent to an employer. The Social Insurance Court of the Canton Ticino dismissed the appeal against this denial.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_583/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning supervisory complaints and disciplinary reports
Summary of the facts
The appellant, debtor in two debt enforcement proceedings at the Zurich 10 Debt Enforcement Office, complained about the handling or non-handling of her submissions by the lower courts. In particular, she accused the district court of not having dealt with or forwarded her supervisory complaints. The Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich did not take up one of her appeals due to tardiness. The appellant then filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_341/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning service of payment orders
Summary of the facts
A.________ SA, a company based in Q.________, was requested by the Geneva Cantonal Debt Enforcement Office to settle payments from rent arrears and other claims. After numerous attempts to serve the payment order and the bankruptcy warning failed, service was effected by public announcement. A.________ SA filed objections and several complaints due to alleged defects in service and representation of the creditor B.________ SA. The lower court dismissed the complaints as unfounded or inadmissible.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_752/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning evidence evaluation and coercion
Summary of the facts
In two proceedings, the appellant A.________ contested various criminal allegations. On the one hand, these concerned her own conviction by the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich for coercion and unauthorized recording of conversations (proceedings 7B_752/2025). On the other hand, she claimed that B.________, her former partner, was wrongly acquitted of charges of rape, sexual coercion, threats, and assault (proceedings 7B_753/2025). Central points of dispute were the evaluation of evidence, the principle "in dubio pro reo," and the admissibility of a secretly recorded audio recording.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_174/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning compensation of a free legal representative
Summary of the facts
A.________ was appointed as a free legal representative of the defendant wife in a divorce proceeding. After consent to a divorce agreement, the District Court of Bremgarten set A.________’s attorney’s fee at CHF 10,683.40. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau increased this amount to CHF 18,804.45, which the Federal Supreme Court challenged and referred for re-examination. In a renewed decision, the Higher Court confirmed the compensation. A.________ filed an appeal to the Federal Supreme Court against this.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_504/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning withdrawal of registration with disability insurance
Summary of the facts
The deceased C.________ registered with the disability insurance (IV) in December 2019. After her death in December 2020, her daughters A.________ and B.________, who were the heirs, applied for withdrawal of the IV registration. The IV office rejected the withdrawal citing legitimate interests of third parties (pension fund Stiftung D.________). The Higher Court of the Canton of Schaffhausen confirmed this view. The appellants requested the Federal Supreme Court to overturn the cantonal decision.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_798/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning communication in appeal proceedings
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ filed a criminal appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against an order of the Higher Court of the Canton of Solothurn, Criminal Chamber, dated 16 June 2026. The appellant did not comment on the contested order or on his standing to appeal. Instead, his submission contained appellate criticism of the cantonal authorities.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_569/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning disability pension
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ suffered a serious accident to his left hand during his apprenticeship as a polymechanic in 2019, resulting in permanent impairments. After several surgeries and IV retraining as a merchant with a federal diploma, he applied for a disability pension from Suva. Suva rejected the application due to a disability degree of only 6% and lack of conditions for an integrity compensation. The cantonal insurance court dismissed the appeal against this. A.________ then requested the Federal Supreme Court to overturn the judgment and oblige Suva to pay the statutory insurance benefits.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_572/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning non-acceptance order of the public prosecutor's office
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court against a decision of the Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Geneva dated 7 April 2026, which dismissed the appeal against a non-acceptance order of the Geneva public prosecutor's office from 5 January 2026. A.________ requested that the public prosecutor's office be ordered to open criminal proceedings or, subsidiarily, that the decision be overturned and the matter referred back to the public prosecutor's office for re-assessment.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_260/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning reopening of divorce proceedings
Summary of the facts
The parties A.________ (husband) and B.________ (wife) have disputed for several years the validity of their marriage contract and two inheritance waiver agreements. In this context, the divorce was already partially granted, while the ancillary effects of the divorce proceedings were to be decided separately. The proceedings were suspended in the meantime to await the decision on the validity of the marriage contract. The husband applied here for reopening the divorce proceedings, which was rejected by the lower courts.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_456/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning advance payment of costs
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed an appeal against an order of the president of the criminal chamber of the Cantonal Court of the Canton of Jura. By this order, he was imposed a deadline for payment of an advance on costs under threat of non-acceptance. The appeal was declared inadmissible by the president of the criminal chamber due to non-payment of the advance on costs.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6B_85/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning commercial fraud and complicity
Summary of the facts
A former Engineering Manager of B.________ AG (A.________) and another person (C.________) were convicted in first instance and by the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau for commercial fraud and complicity in multiple frauds. They caused financial losses by circumventing a delivery ban via intermediary companies of B.________ AG. Both filed appeals against the convictions.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_590/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning recusal request
Summary of the facts
A.A. and B.A. filed a recusal request against Judge Katia Elkaim. The criminal appeals chamber of the Vaud Cantonal Court declared the request inadmissible on 03.03.2026 due to lack of a legitimate interest of the applicants. The applicants filed an appeal on 07.05.2026 and also requested free legal aid.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_830/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning attachment notice
Summary of the facts
The appellant challenged an order of the Higher Court of the Canton of Bern, supervisory authority in debt enforcement and bankruptcy matters, regarding an attachment notice and its execution. He alleged, among other things, a denial of justice, as the Higher Court allegedly did not decide on all his legal claims. In these proceedings, he accused the Higher Court of several legal violations, including violation of his right to assessment, reasoning, and treatment in good faith.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_826/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning protective custody
Summary of the facts
The appellant is in protective custody. The Family Court of Bremgarten transferred responsibility for release to the clinic. An application by the appellant to move to the canton of Lucerne was construed by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Aargau as a de facto release request, which it did not take up due to lack of jurisdiction and forwarded to the clinic. The appellant then turned to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_490/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning unsealing of evidence
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed an appeal on 18.04.2026 against a decision of the Cantonal Coercive Measures Court St. Gallen dated 15.04.2026. The appeal concerned the unsealing of evidence within a criminal investigation. After the public prosecutor's office of the Canton of Schwyz took over the proceedings and withdrew the unsealing request, the appeal proceedings became moot.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.