Latest Judgments of the Federal Supreme Court
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Supreme Court (FSCR) 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 fields.
9C_197/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning reimbursement of health insurance benefits
Summary of the Facts
Helsana Versicherungen AG demanded reimbursement from A.________ AG of a total of CHF 161,063.28 for wrongly paid fees for ophthalmic surgical services between 2015 and 2020. The cantonal arbitration court partially upheld the claim and obliged A.________ AG to repay CHF 48,271.60. Both Helsana and A.________ AG filed appeals with the Federal Supreme Court.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court joined the two proceedings (Art. 24 CPC in conjunction with Art. 71 FSA). The basis for the assessment is the allegation of legal violations pursuant to Art. 95 et seq. FSA, whereby the court examines the application of the law ex officio (Art. 106 para. 1 FSA). The dispute concerns the recovery of wrongly paid benefits within the framework of mandatory health care insurance (MHI). The correct application of cantonal and federal provisions was examined, particularly regarding dignity requirements, protection of legitimate expectations, and limitation periods. A violation of the right to be heard by the cantonal arbitration court was denied. The arbitration court found that the treating physician from A.________ AG did not possess the necessary qualitative dignity for the services provided. The obligation to reimburse arises from Art. 25 ATSG. The legally sufficient substantiation of the claim as assumed by the cantonal arbitration court and the insufficient contestation by A.________ AG were confirmed. With regard to protection of legitimate expectations and the calculation bases of the fees, A.________ AG's arguments were not legally sufficient. Regarding the limitation period under Art. 25 ATSG, it had to be clarified from when the insurer should have known about the physician’s lack of dignity. The lower court erred in setting the start of the period at the introduction of the medical professions register, as no publicity effect regarding dignity was given.
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court annulled the decision of the arbitration court and remanded the case for a new decision. The court costs were imposed on the losing parties, and Helsana had to compensate A.________ AG.
9C_149/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning higher taxation
Summary of the Facts
A.________ AG challenged the tax assessment by the Cantonal Tax Office of Zurich for the 2020 tax period and requested higher taxation. The Zurich Tax Appeals Court did not admit the appeal due to the lack of a legitimate interest of A.________ AG. The Zurich Administrative Court confirmed this non-admission decision. A.________ AG filed an appeal in public law matters to the Federal Supreme Court against this judgment.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The Federal Supreme Court examines jurisdiction and admissibility requirements ex officio. Art. 42 para. 2 FSA requires that the appellant demonstrates fulfillment of admissibility requirements unless they are obviously met. - **E.2:** The lower court relied on current case law (BGE 150 II 409) and held that there was no legitimate interest in higher taxation. The appellant's arguments were insufficient to refute this view. - **E.3:** The appellant failed to sufficiently demonstrate why the decision of the Tax Appeals Court should have been overturned. Therefore, the Federal Supreme Court did not admit the appeal. - **E.4:** The costs of the proceedings are imposed on the appellant (Art. 66 para. 1 FSA).
Summary of the Dispositive
The Federal Supreme Court did not admit the appeal and imposed court costs of CHF 1,000.- on the appellant.
7B_1065/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning a recusal request
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ requested on June 11 and 12, 2025, the recusal of all members involved in an earlier decision of the Superior Court of the Canton of Zug. The recusal request was rejected by the Superior Court on August 25, 2025, by decision (non-admission; alternatively substantive dismissal). A.________ then filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court requesting the annulment of the decision and the recusal of the persons concerned.
Summary of the Considerations
**E.1:** Appeals in criminal matters are generally admissible under Art. 78 para. 1 and Art. 92 para. 1 FSA against independently issued interlocutory decisions on recusal requests. The Superior Court was the sole cantonal instance. The appeal dated September 24, 2025, was filed in due form and time, so it is basically admissible.
**E.2:** The appeal reasoning must, according to Art. 42 paras. 1 and 2 FSA, precisely and independently explain how the contested decision violates federal law. Imprecise and merely accusatory criticism is inadmissible.
**E.3:** A.________ alleged that the lower court violated his right to reply. The Federal Supreme Court rejected this objection as he was given sufficient opportunity to comment before the decision of August 25, 2025.
**E.4:** The lower court did not admit the recusal request because it was late and the appellant’s conduct was assessed as an impermissible challenge of procedural management. The Federal Supreme Court found that the appellant’s complaints did not sufficiently contradict these findings and were therefore unfounded.
**E.5:** The request for legal aid was dismissed because the appeal was hopeless.
Summary of the Dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, the request for legal aid was rejected, and costs were imposed on the appellant.
6B_418/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning residence permit and document forgery
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a Kosovar citizen, applied for a residence permit in Switzerland in 2017 within the framework of Operation Papyrus. For this purpose, he allegedly submitted forged documents to prove at least eight years of uninterrupted presence in Switzerland. The Geneva Police Court acquitted him in this regard. On appeal by the public prosecutor’s office, the Geneva appellate instance found him guilty of false statements to authorities and document forgery and imposed a fine.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_388/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning tax assessment
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________ AG, failed to submit a proper tax return for the 2023 tax period despite reminders and was assessed by discretion with final effect. After unsuccessful revision of the assessment by the cantonal tax administration, her appeal was also rejected by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zug.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_680/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning input tax deductions and contribution taxation
Summary of the Facts
A.________ GmbH (formerly B.________ GmbH) was entered in the register of VAT-liable persons from January 1, 2016. For prior tax periods, A.________ GmbH applied retroactively to claim input tax on the construction of a developed property sold in 2015 to D.________ AG. The Federal Tax Administration (FTA) refused to consider the input tax and contribution taxation, relying on the finding that delivery of the property occurred before A.________ GmbH was registered as a VAT-liable person. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed the FTA’s decision, after which A.________ GmbH appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_466/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning detention conditions and solitary confinement
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced by the Superior Court of the Canton of Solothurn in 2014 to 16 years and 3 months’ imprisonment for intentional killing and other offenses. A stationary therapeutic measure under Art. 59 Criminal Code was ordered, later replaced by preventive detention. From November 22, 2024, to February 28, 2025, A.________ was held under the so-called "intervention stage" detention regime, which is equated with solitary confinement. A.________ alleged violations of Art. 3 ECHR (prohibition of inhuman treatment) and Art. 10 Federal Constitution and filed an appeal to have the detention conditions reviewed.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_1090/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning release from detention request
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a criminal appeal against the judgment of the Cantonal Court of Fribourg dated June 19, 2026. The appeal concerns the dismissal of his request for release from detention. The Federal Supreme Court examined the admissibility of the appeal.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_341/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning legal aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________, received social assistance and moved from U.________ to V.________ in October 2025. The Centre social régional de la Broye-Vully refused to cover the rent costs for her former apartment. This decision was confirmed by the Direction générale de la cohésion sociale (DGCS) and later by the Cantonal Court of the Canton of Vaud. A.________ filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court and applied for legal aid. Legal aid was denied, and the Federal Supreme Court ordered her to pay an advance on costs, which was not paid within the deadline.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_1000/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning standing to appeal in a criminal matter
Summary of the Facts
A.________, former director and board member of B.________ Bank AG, filed charges against C.________ for defamation and, alternatively, slander, as well as for alleged violation of banking secrecy. The Zurich-Sihl public prosecutor’s office ordered the non-initiation of criminal proceedings. The Zurich Superior Court dismissed the appeal against this order.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_292/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning cantonal and municipal taxes
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ from U.________/AG was charged fees for late submission of her 2023 tax return and late payment of her definitive cantonal and municipal taxes. Furthermore, a legal objection against a payment order was lifted. The lower court dismissed her appeal and denied legal aid due to lack of prospects.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_728/2024: Non-admission of the appeal concerning the admissibility of a project adjustment
Summary of the Facts
A new construction project in Weggis, originally approved in 2015, was subject to an alternative project adjustment (including transfer of utilization) in 2022/2023. The focus was on changes to the building project on parcel no. 933, in particular adjustments to room layout, window arrangement, terrain changes, and floor area calculations. After separate objection procedures, the Weggis municipal council granted the necessary building permits. A complaint filed by neighbors (A.________ and B.________) before the Lucerne Cantonal Court was dismissed in 2024. The neighbors then filed an appeal in public law matters with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
9C_389/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning revision of a discretionary assessment
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, A.________ AG, was assessed at discretion for the 2023 tax period due to failure to submit a tax return and annual accounts. A subsequent request for revision of this assessment was not processed by the tax administration of the Canton of Zug, and the objection was rejected. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Zug confirmed this decision.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_465/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning issuance of a learner’s permit
Summary of the Facts
A.________ applied to the Road Traffic and Shipping Office of the Canton of St. Gallen for a learner’s permit, which was denied based on a traffic medical report. After further appeals to the Administrative Appeals Commission and the Administrative Court of the Canton of St. Gallen, both rejected, A.________ finally filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court for denial or delay of justice.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_120/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning termination of proceedings in a fraud case
Summary of the Facts
A.________ SA (appellant) challenges various procedural acts related to the termination of fraud proceedings against B.B.________ SA (now liquidated following bankruptcy in 2021). It concerns in particular the handling of a loan agreement ('Facility Agreement') amounting to 15 million euros granted by A.________ SA to B.B.________ SA. In the related criminal matter, the cantonal court dismissed an appeal against the termination order and partially declared itself incompetent.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
6B_359/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning expulsion and money laundering
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________, Ethiopian citizen, was convicted by the Criminal Court of the Saane District for money laundering and violations of the Narcotics Act (LStup). He received a prison sentence of 42 months and was expelled from Switzerland for 10 years. The lower court, the Cantonal Court of Fribourg, confirmed the judgment. A.________ requested the Federal Supreme Court to lift the expulsion as disproportionate and infringing his personal rights.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_690/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning wage garnishment
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Supreme Court had to decide on an appeal concerning wage garnishment. The appellant A.________ objected to the order of the Debt Collection Office Bellinzona dated 12.12.2025, according to which the wage exceeding the subsistence amount of CHF 4,680.-- was garnished. The cantonal supervisory authority partly dismissed the appeal against this order as inadmissible (due to lateness) and partly as unfounded.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_1023/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning criminal identification procedures
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is suspected of having committed several sexual assaults, including sexual coercion and harassment. The Bern-Mittelland Public Prosecutor’s Office ordered fingerprinting on 23.04.2025. This measure was confirmed by the Bern Superior Court on 26.08.2025. A.________ filed an appeal against this decision with the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_479/2026: Non-admission of the appeal concerning super-provisional legal protection and support benefits
Summary of the Facts
The appellant requests the Federal Supreme Court to instruct the Basel-Landschaft Cantonal Court to decide on an urgent request for super-provisional legal protection. The matter concerns the resumption of discontinued support benefits and the granting of supplementary benefits. The Cantonal Court did not admit the request due to lack of functional jurisdiction. During the proceedings, the cantonal court clarified that a procedure on the same matter had already been concluded.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
1C_429/2025: Non-admission of the appeal concerning authorization to prosecute
Summary of the Facts
The investigation by the Feldkirch public prosecutor’s office on suspicion of National Socialist reactivation led to the ordering and execution of a house search at A.________ in Switzerland. Subsequently, A.________ requested the opening of criminal proceedings against the involved officials for abuse of office. The St. Gallen indictment chamber refused the authorization. A.________ appealed to the Federal Supreme Court requesting annulment of the decision and issuance of the authorization.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.