Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most current judgments of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present detailed summaries with facts, considerations, and dispositions. For the other judgments, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete 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.
5A_345/2025: Inadmissibility of a complaint regarding a representative guardianship
Summary of the Facts
The KESB Pfäffikon ZH established a representative guardianship for B.________. In response, B.________ and his separated wife A.________ each filed a separate complaint. A.________'s complaint was not addressed by the District Council of Pfäffikon, as there was no right of appeal due to a contact ban. The Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the complaint filed against this decision. A.________ then filed another complaint with the Federal Court and requested free legal assistance.
Summary of the Considerations
1. According to Art. 42 para. 1 and para. 2 BGG, the submission must contain a legal request and a substantial justification. 2. A.________'s complaint does not meet these requirements. Neither a legal request is formulated, nor is there an engagement with the contested decision. 3. Due to the lack of justification, the complaint is considered obviously insufficient. It will not be considered in the simplified procedure according to Art. 108 para. 1 lit. b BGG. 4. Court costs will be waived, which renders the request for free legal assistance moot.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint will not be considered, no court costs are incurred, and the request for free legal assistance is moot.
5D_23/2025: Non-appearance of a constitutional complaint regarding a process cost advance
Summary of the Facts
The daughter of the complainant requested a process cost advance of CHF 5,000 in a procedure regarding child support. The court presidency of Lenzburg ordered him to pay and simultaneously rejected his request for free legal assistance. The Higher Court of Aargau upheld this decision. The complainant filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint with the Federal Court, claiming that travel costs and financing costs of his private vehicle should be considered. Additionally, he requested free legal assistance in the federal proceedings.
Summary of the Considerations
1. (E. 1) The value of the dispute only allows for a subsidiary constitutional complaint. The complainant must demonstrate how constitutional rights were violated; however, corresponding indications are missing in his submission.
2. (E. 2) Instead of arguing constitutional violations, the complainant presents appellate arguments regarding the use of his private vehicle. These are insufficient to demonstrate a constitutional violation.
3. (E. 3) The complaint is obviously inadequately justified, and therefore it cannot be considered. The decision is made in the simplified procedure.
4. (E. 4) Due to the hopelessness of the complaint, free legal assistance is denied.
5. (E. 5) The court costs of CHF 1,000 are imposed on the complainant.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint is not considered, the request for free legal assistance is denied, and the court costs are imposed on the complainant.
2C_27/2023: Revocation of the residence permit and expulsion
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.A., a national of Ivory Coast, received an EU/EFTA residence permit in Switzerland as part of the family reunification with his minor son. After divorcing his wife, the Migration Office of the Canton of Solothurn revoked this permit and ordered his expulsion, which was ultimately confirmed by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Solothurn. The complainant appealed to the Federal Court, requesting the restoration of his residence permit based on his right to family life under Art. 8 ECHR.
Summary of the Considerations
1. (E. 1.1-1.3): The complaint was deemed admissible, and the procedural language was determined to be German. The subsidiary constitutional complaint was considered inadmissible. 2. (E. 2.1-2.2): The Federal Court examines legal questions ex officio but adheres to the factual findings of the lower court as long as they are not arbitrary. 3. (E. 3.1-3.4): The lower court denied a particularly close bond between father and son, as the complainant had only minimally cared for his son before entering Switzerland, and the intensity of father-son contact remained limited after entry. These findings are not arbitrary. 4. (E. 4.1-4.4): A claim for reverse family reunification according to Art. 8 ECHR requires a particularly close affective and economic relationship as well as impeccable behavior of the foreign parent. In light of all circumstances, the complainant did not meet these criteria. 5. (E. 5.1-5.6): The affective and economic bond with the son is insufficient to establish a claim under Art. 8 ECHR. The complainant's behavior, particularly the deliberate concealment of the divorce, additionally contradicts the requirements. The balancing of interests favors public interests in expelling the complainant. 6. (E. 6): The complaint is to be dismissed, and the request for free legal assistance is also denied due to hopelessness.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint was dismissed, and the request for free legal assistance was also denied. Furthermore, the court costs were imposed on the complainant.
7B_149/2025: Inadmissibility of the request for withdrawal
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was reported for multiple property damage on a property in V.________. During a police interrogation, he requested that the proceedings be transferred to another prosecution authority due to the alleged bias of the responsible public prosecutor's office. The indictment chamber of the Canton of St. Gallen did not consider the corresponding request for withdrawal.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_267/2024: Withdrawal of a public prosecutor in the criminal proceedings against A.________
Summary of the Facts
B.________ filed a criminal complaint in 2018 for repeated unfair competition against A.________ and C.________. Prosecutor Jürg Hitz conducted the investigations, during which indictments were filed, local jurisdictions were challenged, and the proceedings were ultimately transferred to the Regional Court of Maloja. A.________ filed a request for withdrawal against Prosecutor Hitz in September 2023, which was rejected by the Cantonal Court of Graubünden. A.________ appealed this decision to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_654/2024: Rejection of the facilitated naturalization
Summary of the Facts
The Kosovo national A.________ applied for facilitated naturalization in 2020 after marrying a Swiss citizen in 2015. This was rejected because A.________ did not meet the required written language skills (at least level A2). His complaints regarding health problems after an accident and his long-term integration were not recognized as sufficient grounds for an exception to the requirements.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_342/2025: Judgment regarding the guardianship order
Summary of the Facts
The KESB Biel ordered procedural representation and precautionary guardianship for the complainant according to Art. 394 and Art. 395 ZGB. After a psychiatric assessment and a protective placement, the KESB confirmed the guardianship but lifted the placement. The lower court (Higher Court of the Canton of Bern) dismissed the complaint against the guardianship. The complainant appealed this decision to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_197/2025: Decision regarding free legal assistance
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a lawsuit against his former employer B.________, Association cantonale C.________, on March 18, 2024, claiming CHF 37,250 in connection with an allegedly abusive dismissal. On May 3, 2024, he requested free legal assistance for the proceedings. This was denied by the lower court on November 1, 2024, as the chances of success of the lawsuit were deemed low, particularly due to insufficient evidence and calculations of the claim. The subsequent cantonal appeal was declared inadmissible by the Court of the Canton of Geneva on March 12, 2025. No court costs were incurred.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_633/2024: Judgment regarding the rejection of measures to enforce a business relationship between a bank and a company
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a Swiss company (A.________ SA) based in Lausanne, requested the opening of a bank account with the respondent (B.________ SA). She claimed that due to the termination of her previous banking relationship and the rejection by several other banks, she was facing insolvency and suffering irreparable damage. The respondent refused to open the account citing its internal guidelines and the sensitivity of the appellant's business model, particularly due to the nationalities and residences of its beneficial owners.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_226/2025: Inadmissibility of a late legal remedy in the context of foreign law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________, a Turkish national, was ordered to leave Switzerland on February 17, 2025, by the Service de la population et des migrants of the Canton of Fribourg based on Art. 64 para. 1 AuG. His legal remedy against the expulsion decision, submitted on March 24, 2025, was declared late by the Cantonal Court of Fribourg and thus not considered. The Federal Court examines the admissibility of the subsequently filed complaint.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_281/2025: Restoration of the objection deadline
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was served with a payment order but did not raise an objection within the deadline. He later requested the restoration of the objection deadline from the District Court of Arbon, which was denied. After an unsuccessful appeal to the Higher Court, he turned to the Federal Court, which deemed the complaint insufficiently justified and did not consider it.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_339/2025: Decision regarding the super-provisional lifting of the seizure
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, whose wage seizure was ordered on March 6, 2025, requested its lifting as well as a super-provisional order against his employer. After several complaints and adjustments of the wage seizure by the enforcement office, the District Court dismissed the request for super-provisional lifting due to mootness. The Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich confirmed this decision. The complainant appealed to the Federal Court, which did not consider his complaint.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_215/2025: Judgment regarding unemployment insurance and process requirements
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, demanded the waiver of reclaimed daily allowance payments under unemployment insurance. The lower court denied good faith, making the examination of great hardship as a second requirement for waiver unnecessary. The complainant appealed this decision to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_296/2024: Decision regarding unemployment insurance: Question of placement capability
Summary of the Facts
The respondent A.________, a former employee in Italy, registered with the Swiss unemployment office after a work incapacity due to health limitations to apply for daily allowances. However, the cantonal unemployment insurance refused to provide benefits from May 2023, arguing that the invalidity determined by the disability insurance of over 80% qualified him as not placement capable. The cantonal court decided otherwise and ordered a review of the insured income, including Article 40b of the OACI. The case was subsequently brought before the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_273/2024: Decision on a request for withdrawal against a public prosecutor
Summary of the Facts
B.________ filed a criminal complaint in 2018 for unfair competition against C.________. Prosecutor Jürg Hitz led the investigation and filed multiple charges; among others, initially at a locally incompetent court, later at the correct location. C.________ then filed a request for withdrawal against the prosecutor, which was rejected by the Cantonal Court of Graubünden. C.________ appealed to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1051/2023: National expulsion of an offender: Federal Court confirms cantonal judgment
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a Cuban national, was convicted by the District Court of Winterthur for the unlawful receipt of benefits from a social insurance or social assistance (Art. 148a para. 1 StGB) to a fine and a national expulsion of five years. The Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich confirmed the national expulsion. A.________ filed a criminal complaint with the Federal Court and requested the overturning of the national expulsion based on an alleged hardship case.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_336/2025: Decision regarding free legal assistance in a modification procedure regarding a divorce judgment
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ requested super-provisional measures in connection with a procedure to amend a divorce judgment and requested free legal assistance for this. The District Court of Zurzach rejected this request due to insufficient documentation regarding process poverty. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau subsequently rejected both the appeal against this decision and the granting of free legal assistance for the cantonal proceedings. The complainant then appealed to the Federal Court, requesting the overturning of the lower court decisions and free legal assistance for all procedural instances.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_344/2025: Inadmissibility of a child support advance
Summary of the Facts
The father A.________ requested the advance of child support contributions from the District Court after the change of custody, claiming that the mother was financially incapable. Due to hopelessness, he was denied free legal assistance, and due to lack of payment of the court cost advance, the District Court did not consider the complaint. The Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau did not consider the father's appeal against this due to insufficient justification. The father then appealed to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_110/2025: Withdrawal of the right to determine the residence and placement of a child
Summary of the Facts
The mother A.________ has sole parental custody over her daughter B.________, who had been in need of support for some time. Due to an allegation of physical violence against the child according to the statement of the daycare worker, the KESB provisionally revoked the mother's right to determine the residence, and the child was placed in a specialized institution. After a hearing, the revocation of the right to determine the residence and the placement was confirmed by the KESB in September 2024. The mother filed a complaint, which was dismissed by the Higher Court of Bern, leading her to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5D_10/2025: Judgment regarding the subsidiary constitutional complaint regarding negative declaratory action
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was sued by the Canton of Zurich in a debt collection for CHF 1,525.-- as well as interest, reminder fees, and collection costs. She subsequently filed a negative declaratory action with the District Court of Zurich according to Art. 85a SchKG, which was partially upheld and partially dismissed. Her complaint against this decision to the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich was unsuccessful. She filed a subsidiary constitutional complaint against the higher court decision with the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_297/2025: Seizability of a property according to Art. 92 para. 2 SchKG
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ contests the seizure of his property by the enforcement office of Fischbach-Göslikon and claims that it is unseizable according to Art. 92 para. 2 SchKG due to overindebtedness from existing mortgage burdens. The District Court of Bremgarten and the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau dismissed his complaints. In a submission to the Federal Court, the complainant requests the overturning of the decision as well as the seizure.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_375/2025: Preventive detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced by the first instance to 12 years of imprisonment for repeated serious sexual offenses, including rape, sexual coercion, sexual acts with children, and pornography. In addition to criminal consequences, lifelong professional and activity bans in dealing with minors and outpatient therapeutic measures were ordered. Preventive detention until June 11, 2025, was also ordered. The cantonal legal remedies of the complaint and the claim before the second instance led to the confirmation of the security measure by the cantonal court. A.________ subsequently filed a legal remedy before the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9F_4/2025: Request for revision against a Federal Court ruling on state and municipal taxes as well as direct federal tax
Summary of the Facts
The applicant A.________ requested the revision of a judgment of the Swiss Federal Court dated January 30, 2025 (9C_522/2024) regarding state and municipal taxes of the Canton of Valais as well as direct federal tax for the tax period 2020. She based this on the revision grounds of Art. 121 lit. a, b, c, d and Art. 123 para. 2 lit. a BGG. Furthermore, she requested the withdrawal of the court personnel involved in the original judgment. The Federal Court accepted the request but dismissed it as unfounded.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5F_21/2025: Request for revision against a federal court ruling regarding eviction of a property
Summary of the Facts
The applicant, co-owner of a property, had unsuccessfully filed numerous legal remedies against enforcement, allocation, and eviction decisions. A previous ruling by the Federal Court (5A_811/2017) rejected her complaint against the eviction. After an initial unsuccessful revision in 2024, she submitted another revision request, claiming that the local jurisdiction of the District Court of Zurich had been disputed at that time, relying on a newly obtained transcription.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_335/2025: Judgment regarding preventive placement
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ was placed in preventive care at Clinic C.________ by medical referral on March 21, 2025. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Schwyz lifted this measure on April 2, 2025, and ordered the clinic to discharge the complainant. The complainant turned to the Federal Court on May 3, 2025.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_249/2025: Complaint against the non-consideration of a request regarding bankruptcy opening
Summary of the Facts
The complainant declared himself unable to pay at the District Court of Bülach on November 8, 2024, and requested the opening of bankruptcy proceedings according to Art. 191 SchKG. The District Court rejected the request on December 13, 2024. In letters dated March 10 and 17, 2025, the complainant approached the District Court again, which forwarded the submissions to the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich. By decision of March 28, 2025, the Higher Court did not consider the complaint due to lateness. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court on April 2, 2025.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_959/2024: Decision regarding unsealing in criminal proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of Frauenfeld is conducting a criminal investigation against A.________ for various offenses (circulating counterfeit money, trademark infringements, fraudulent trademark use, and falsification of goods). In the course of a house search on May 13, 2024, a mobile phone and a PC tower were seized, the unsealing of which was requested by the complainant. The coercive measures court of the Canton of Thurgau approved the unsealing of the devices on September 2, 2024. A.________ appealed this decision to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_225/2025: Withdrawal of the right to determine the residence and provisional placement of children
Summary of the Facts
The parents A.________ and B.________ and their minor children C.________ and D.________ (born in 2016 and 2018) are affected. The justice of the peace of the district of Jura-Nord Vaud temporarily revoked the parents' right to determine the residence of the children and ordered their placement. The parents filed both a complaint and a request for restoration of suspensive effect. The latter was rejected by the delegated judge of the cantonal chamber for guardianship of the Canton of Vaud. The parents then appealed to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_82/2025: Withdrawal of the legal remedy before the Federal Court and cost decision
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint on January 29, 2025, against a decision of the single judge of the Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Valais dated December 30, 2024. On April 29, 2025, she withdrew her legal remedy request after learning from a court letter dated April 1, 2025, that an advance payment of CHF 800 was required.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_1345/2024: Negligent homicide and violation of traffic rules
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was prosecuted for negligent homicide and violation of traffic rules in connection with a traffic accident on December 25, 2018. The District Court of Toggenburg sentenced him to a conditionally enforceable fine and a penalty, which was confirmed by the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen. However, it found a violation of the acceleration requirement. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court, demanding an acquittal and the assumption of the procedural costs by the state treasury.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_567/2024: Judgment regarding the inadmissibility of authorization for prosecution against police officials
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed a criminal complaint against two officials of the Cantonal Police of Zurich, accusing them of trespassing, abuse of office, and coercion. The background was their entry onto his private property and access to his garage during a police investigation. The Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich refused the authorization for prosecution, stating that there was no sufficient suspicion of the crime. A.________ appealed this decision to the Federal Court.
Full summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.