Latest Judgments of the Federal Supreme Court
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Supreme Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the other judgments, you will find a summary of the facts. 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 legal fields.
7B_791/2026: Non-admission of the complaint regarding suspension
Summary of the facts
The legal representative lodged a criminal complaint on behalf of the appellant against an order of the Zurich Cantonal Court concerning suspension. Despite two requests and set deadlines, no power of attorney for proceedings before the Federal Supreme Court was submitted; moreover, the advance payment of costs was not made.
Summary of the considerations
(E.1) The legal representative lodged a complaint on behalf of the appellant against the order concerning suspension. (E.2.1) Party representatives must prove their authority with a power of attorney in appeal proceedings before the Federal Supreme Court. Appointment as a necessary defender in the cantonal procedure does not include authorization to file a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court. (E.2.2) The legal representative was twice requested, under threat of non-admission, to submit a power of attorney but did not do so within the set deadlines. (E.2.3) Due to the lack of power of attorney, the complaint under Art. 108 BGG is inadmissible. (E.3) Also, due to non-payment of the advance on costs, the complaint is inadmissible pursuant to Art. 62 para. 3 and Art. 108 BGG. (E.4) Exceptionally, no court costs are charged.
Summary of the dispositive
The complaint is not admitted. No court costs are charged.
2C_36/2026: Refusal to renew the short-term residence permit due to lack of integration and receipt of supplementary benefits
Summary of the facts
The Italian appellant had been continuously residing in Switzerland again since 2005 and held a short-term residence permit EU/EFTA. After various temporary jobs, unemployment, social assistance, and reaching retirement age, he received AHV, a German pension, and supplementary benefits. The Migration Office refused to renew the short-term residence permit for job search and obliged him to leave. The cantonal remedies were unsuccessful. Before the Federal Supreme Court, he relied in particular on Art. 8 ECHR and his relationship with his disabled son.
Summary of the considerations
E.1: The Federal Supreme Court examines the admissibility requirements ex officio. The complaint is only admissible if there is a justifiable claim to the immigration permit. Claims under the FZA as well as under discretionary permits pursuant to Art. 32 para. 3 and Art. 33 para. 3 AIG are not given. A claim under Art. 8 ECHR due to family life was denied due to the lack of a special dependency relationship to the now adult son. Due to more than ten years of lawful residence, the appellant can justifiably invoke the right to private life; the complaint is admitted with these limitations. E.2: The Federal Supreme Court only examines sufficiently presented and reasoned violations of law. The facts ascertained by the lower court remain binding due to lack of a substantiated factual objection. Documents issued after the contested decision are inadmissible as genuine novelties. E.3: The dispute concerns only the compatibility of the refusal to extend the short-term residence permit or to issue a residence permit with Art. 8 ECHR regarding private life. E.4: Long-term lawful residence can open the scope of protection of Art. 8 ECHR; a balancing of interests according to Art. 8 para. 2 ECHR and Art. 96 AIG is required. The appellant's private interest is significant due to his long presence and residence in Switzerland. This is opposed by a substantial public interest in avoiding further burdens on public funds, as he received social assistance and subsequently significant supplementary benefits. His economic and social integration has not succeeded. Return to Italy is possible and reasonable despite the long absence from the country, age, and lack of close family ties, especially since pensions can be drawn there and no health obstacles exist. The public interest thus outweighs the private interest; the contested decision complies with Art. 8 ECHR. E.5: The complaint is unfounded and must be dismissed, insofar as it can be admitted. Legal aid and legal representation are refused due to lack of prospects; reduced court costs are imposed on the appellant.
Summary of the dispositive
The complaint was dismissed, insofar as it was admissible. Legal aid and legal representation were refused due to lack of prospects, and court costs of CHF 1,000.-- were imposed on the appellant.
7B_1277/2025: Suspension of enforcement of a compulsory expulsion order due to mental illness
Summary of the facts
The appellant, a Serbian national with mental illnesses and recurring suicidal thoughts, was criminally sentenced to a compulsory expulsion of five years. After his provisional admission ended, he applied for suspension of enforcement of the expulsion due to an alleged deterioration of his health; the cantonal court rejected the application.
Summary of the considerations
(E.1–1.2.2) The appeal against the decision on the suspension of enforcement of a compulsory expulsion is in principle admissible as a criminal appeal. However, the appellant must credibly demonstrate that decisive circumstances have changed significantly since the final expulsion judgment. Regarding the alleged risk of retaliation, he does not prove such a new fact; concerning his health, the question of standing remains open. (E.2–2.3.2) The right to be heard was not violated. The requested police witness interrogations concerned an anticipated evaluation of evidence already conducted in the criminal proceedings, and the appellant presented no new elements. The complaint concerning the ECHR is inadmissible due to insufficient reasoning. (E.3–3.2.4) A suspension under Art. 66d para. 1 lit. b StGB requires a significant change in relevant circumstances that excludes enforcement due to binding international law rules, in particular the non-refoulement principle. In cases of serious illness, Art. 3 ECHR can only be violated under exceptional circumstances; generally, it suffices if adequate medical treatment is possible in the destination state. Enforcement must be carefully planned and secured, if necessary, by medical supervision, appropriate handover, and long-term psychiatric treatment. (E.3.3–3.4) The cantonal lower court was entitled to assume that the medical reports submitted after the previous Federal Supreme Court judgment did not demonstrate a significant change in the long-standing mental health issues. The appellant showed neither a relevant new deterioration nor new circumstances regarding medical care in Serbia. However, the ordered medical accompaniment measures must be considered in enforcement planning. (E.4) The statements concerning the lack of personal ties to Serbia do not concern a new fact relevant to suspension and are inadmissible. (E.5) A renewed balancing of interests is not to be made in enforcement proceedings, since the relevant circumstances have already been assessed by the trial court. (E.6–7) There is no such exceptional situation that would require suspension for compelling humanitarian reasons. The appeal is dismissed, insofar as it is admissible; legal aid is refused due to lack of prospects.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, insofar as it was admissible. The request for legal aid was denied and court costs of 1,200 francs were imposed on the appellant.
7B_858/2026: Seizure of a vehicle and prohibition of transfer of ownership or holder change
Summary of the facts
The appellant was convicted of unauthorized acceptance of public deposits. During the appeal hearing, the appeal chamber of the Federal Criminal Court seized a Mercedes-Benz registered to the appellant and ordered a prohibition on transfer of ownership or holder change. The appellant challenged this interlocutory decision before the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_1022/2026: Non-admission of the complaint concerning establishment of a guardianship
Summary of the facts
The KESB Basel-Stadt established a guardianship for the minor appellant pursuant to Art. 308 para. 2 in conjunction with Art. 306 para. 2 CC and appointed a guardian to protect his interests in settling the estate of his deceased father. The Court of Appeal discontinued the appeal proceedings due to late payment of the advance on costs. The appellant, represented by his mother, filed a civil complaint to the Federal Supreme Court against this.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_196/2026: Expulsion from the Schengen area and right to be heard
Summary of the facts
The Vietnamese appellant married a Czech national and received an EU/EFTA residence permit to stay with his wife. After the permit was revoked, the Migration Office ordered his expulsion from Switzerland. The Security Directorate dismissed the appeal and extended the expulsion to the Schengen area. After the appellant left Switzerland during the appeal procedure, the Administrative Court dismissed the appeal in accordance with the reasoning, without addressing the complaint regarding expulsion from the Schengen area.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_1027/2026: Non-admission of the complaint regarding legal aid in provisional measures
Summary of the facts
The appellant requested legal aid in connection with a petition for super-provisional and provisional securing and release of patient records. After the Civil Court and subsequently the Court of Appeal refused legal aid due to lack of prospects, he filed a complaint against the Court of Appeal’s order.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_1023/2026: Non-admission of the complaint regarding recusal of judicial officers
Summary of the facts
The appellant requested the recusal of the president of the Muri district court and later of the vice-president involved in the matter in the criminal proceedings against him. The Cantonal Court did not admit the recusal request against the vice-president and discontinued the recusal request against the president due to lack of object. The appellant filed a criminal complaint and requested legal aid.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
4A_454/2026: Withdrawal of the complaint concerning a tenancy agreement
Summary of the facts
The appellants filed a complaint to the Federal Supreme Court against the judgment of the Schwyz Cantonal Court concerning a tenancy agreement. By letter dated 7 October 2026, they withdrew the complaint.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_886/2026: Non-admission of the complaint concerning recusal request and appointment of an extraordinary public prosecutor
Summary of the facts
B.B.________, his wife A.________, and their children filed a criminal complaint and charges against various authorities and officials of the canton of Obwalden. The Obwalden Cantonal Court granted the prosecution’s recusal request, appointed an extraordinary deputy chief public prosecutor, and approved the recusal of all prosecutors of the canton of Obwalden. The appellants requested the annulment of this decision, particularly alleging bias of the appointed extraordinary public prosecutor.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
5A_1026/2026: Non-admission of the complaint concerning legal aid and complaint of delay in proceedings
Summary of the facts
The appellant requested super-provisional and provisional securing and release of patient records at the Basel-Stadt Civil Court. After the request for legal aid was rejected due to lack of prospects and an advance payment was demanded, he filed a complaint of delay in proceedings at the Court of Appeal, requested legal aid again there, and challenged its rejection before the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_630/2026: Remission of the indictment to the public prosecutor for continuation of the criminal investigation
Summary of the facts
The public prosecutor filed charges against A.________ for multiple money laundering, multiple forgery of documents, and multiple disobedience of official orders. After the district court initially dismissed the indictment to expand the facts, it rejected a renewed remission to the public prosecutor. The indictment chamber did not admit the complaint against this. A.________ then turned to the Federal Supreme Court, requesting among other things the annulment of this decision and the remission of the criminal case to the public prosecutor.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7F_56/2026: Non-admission of the complaint concerning revision of a non-admission decision on pre-trial detention
Summary of the facts
By judgment of 14 July 2026, the Federal Supreme Court did not admit a complaint of the applicant concerning the extension of pre-trial detention in the simplified procedure due to obviously insufficient reasoning. The applicant requested revision of this judgment by submissions dated 6, 13, and 19 August 2026.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_592/2025: EU/EFTA residence permit and protection of private life
Summary of the facts
The Portuguese appellant had lived in Switzerland since 2008 and held an EU/EFTA residence permit for family reunification. After moving out of the parental home, she received supplementary benefits, completed vocational training financed by the disability insurance, and subsequently a work training; her later part-time work was low-paid. The cantonal authorities revoked or did not extend her residence permit because she neither had employee status nor met the conditions for residence without gainful employment.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_877/2026: Non-admission of the complaint concerning request for revision and non-admission
Summary of the facts
The appellants filed complaints in two proceedings against the decision of the Federal Criminal Court, Appeal Chamber, regarding a request for revision, and against the decision of the Aargau Cantonal Court concerning a non-admission order and a recusal request. They also applied for legal aid.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
7B_1004/2026: Withdrawal of the complaint against substitute measures for security detention
Summary of the facts
The appellant filed a complaint against the decision of the president of the Criminal Appeals Court of the Vaud Cantonal Court concerning substitute measures for security detention and requested immediate release from security detention. After the Federal Supreme Court rendered judgment in another case, he was requested to declare whether he wished to maintain the complaint. He then withdrew the complaint and requested the waiver of court costs.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
2C_526/2025: Expiry of permanent residence permit after more than six months abroad
Summary of the facts
The appellants, North Macedonian nationals with permanent residence permits, stayed continuously in North Macedonia from 22 August 2022 to 6 April 2023. Since they neither returned to Switzerland nor filed an application to maintain the permanent residence permits, the office declared their expiry by law and refused reissuance of a residence permit. The cantonal remedies were unsuccessful.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.
8C_475/2026: Restoration of the deadline for appeal against an objection decision
Summary of the facts
The Department of Economy, Innovation, Employment and Heritage of the Canton of Vaud rejected the appellants’ request for restoration of the deadline for appeal against an objection decision of the EVAM and declared the appeal inadmissible due to lateness. The Cantonal Court dismissed the appeal insofar as it was admissible; the appellants then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found on the portal.