Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most recent judgments of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we provide detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositive parts. For the subsequent 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.
4A_169/2025: Decision on the appeal regarding free legal aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ had filed an application for free legal aid in a debt collection proceeding, which was rejected by the Civil Circuit Court of Basel-Landschaft West on November 25, 2024, due to the hopelessness of his claim. The Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft confirmed this decision on March 4, 2025. The appellant then filed an appeal with the Federal Court, which was not submitted within the required legal deadline and was inadequately justified.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examines the admissibility of an appeal ex officio and finds that the appeal period of 30 days according to Art. 100 para. 1 BGG for the appellant's submission on May 14, 2025, had already expired. A sufficient justification is required for an admissible appeal. The appellant did not specifically demonstrate how the contested decision of the Cantonal Court would have violated federal law and was also unable to conclusively present a violation of the ECHR, the BV, or the ZPO. The appeal was classified as inadequately justified. The Federal Court waives court costs due to the circumstances and declares the request for exemption from these costs in the federal proceedings as moot.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The appeal was not processed, no court costs were incurred, and no party compensation was awarded.
7B_571/2023: Decision on the quality of the appeal and cost distribution in a case of termination of proceedings due to alleged defamation
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a former employee of C.________ SA, filed a criminal complaint against "unknown," which was later directed at B.________. The cause was statements made by B.________ about allegedly inappropriate behavior by A.________ at work. These statements led to his suspension and subsequent dismissal. After the investigation by the Neuchâtel Public Prosecutor's Office, the criminal proceedings were terminated due to insufficient evidence for the accusations. The first-instance court rejected an appeal against this termination, as the statements made by B.________ showed at least "some" probability and were justified by good motives.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1**: The Federal Court examines the admissibility of appeals ex officio. The appellant meets the formal requirements for an appeal in criminal matters according to the Federal Court Act (BGG). - **E.1.2**: However, A.________, as a private plaintiff, did not sufficiently demonstrate how the case could impact civil claims. There are no specific details, especially concerning the subjective severity of the alleged moral violation and civil damages. - **E.1.3**: The nature of the alleged defamation does not justify recognition of a criminally relevant defamatory damage. - **E.2.3**: The cost distribution in terminated proceedings is justified considering the factual participation of the appellant in the investigation and his role as a private plaintiff. According to Art. 427 para. 2 StPO, he bears the costs of the terminated proceedings.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The appeal was partially upheld, and the court costs were imposed on the appellant.
5A_742/2024: Dispute over the registration of a mortgage according to Art. 712i ZGB in the land register
Summary of the Facts
The co-owners B.________ and C.________ had a condominium, which was publicly auctioned due to debts. The condominium owners' association (PPE A.________) applied for the right to register a legally prescribed mortgage according to Art. 712i ZGB in the land register without it being previously registered in the land register. The cantonal office for debt collection refused to include this claim in the land register, leading to complaints and an appeal, which ultimately reached the Federal Court. The PPE requested that its right be directly recorded in the land register, which it saw as more efficient.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1**: The appeal is admissible and submitted on time. It concerns a final cantonal decision and a debt collection dispute according to Art. 72 para. 2 lit. a BGG. - **E.2**: The right to record a mortgage according to Art. 712i ZGB is a personal right that only arises through registration in the land register as a burdening right on the property. The claimed right only constitutes a claim for registration and not an existing encumbrance. - **E.3**: The cantonal office was allowed to refuse the inclusion of this claim in the land register, as only existing encumbrances on the property must be recorded in the land register. - **E.5**: The Federal Court confirms the necessity of prior registration of the mortgage in the land register according to earlier case law (especially BGE 123 III 53). It points out that registration is constitutive for the existence of the mortgage.
Summary of the Dispositive Part
The appeal was dismissed, the court costs were imposed on the appellant, and there were no party compensations.
9C_287/2025: Decision on the expiration of the deadline in a tax law appeal
Summary of the Facts
A.________ contested a decision of the cantonal tax authorities of the Canton of Ticino regarding cantonal taxes and direct federal tax for the tax periods 2016–2017. The cantonal appeal was rejected by the competent chamber on March 13, 2025. A.________ submitted appeals to the Federal Court on May 17, 2025, requesting an extension of the deadline to complete the submissions.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9F_5/2025: Judgment on the household levy and cost advance in revision proceedings
Summary of the Facts
The applicants A.________ and B.________ submitted a request for revision on March 28, 2025, against a judgment of the Federal Court from March 4, 2025, which concerned the household levy according to Art. 69 ff. RTVG. The Federal Court initially requested the applicants to pay a cost advance of CHF 1,500.- and later set a deadline until May 23, 2025. However, the advance was neither paid in time nor during the extended deadline, which is why the court did not consider the revision request.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_250/2025: Decision on a dispute regarding supplementary benefits to AHV/IV
Summary of the Facts
The appellant applied for supplementary benefits to AHV/IV on January 12, 2024, after receiving retroactive approval of a widow's pension from the cantonal compensation office as of October 1, 2018, on January 9, 2024. However, the retroactive benefits were fully offset against previously paid social assistance. The compensation office granted supplementary benefits retroactively from October 2023 and transferred them directly to social assistance, as they had provided provisional support. The Cantonal Court confirmed the calculations and procedures of the compensation office.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_747/2023: Judgment regarding divorce and maintenance contributions
Summary of the Facts
This is a proceeding concerning divorce and provisional maintenance measures for the spouse and a minor child, who later reached adulthood. The case involves, among other things, the calculation of the maintenance contribution as well as the issues of feasibility and determination of a hypothetical income for the wife.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_791/2023: Judgment on attempted serious bodily injury and expulsion
Summary of the Facts
During the city festival of Solothurn in 2018, a confrontation occurred in which the appellant, A.________, kicked B.B.________, who was lying on the ground, in the head, resulting in serious but not life-threatening injuries. A.________ was convicted of attempted serious bodily injury and brawling, and an appeal led to a reduction of the prison sentence and an adjustment of the conditions of imprisonment. The Federal Court had to rule on the alleged arbitrariness, the expulsion, and the civil claims.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_163/2024: Review of the rejection of the increase of the IBUS in a local planning area
Summary of the Facts
The municipalities of Courgevaux (FR) conducted a revision of their local zoning plan. Several plots in the "Vers le Pont" zone were reclassified from a medium residential density zone to a village zone, with an increase in the index of land use coefficient (IBUS) from 0.80 to 1.50 planned. The cantonal directorate (DIME) rejected the increase of the IBUS on the grounds that the affected plots did not justify a higher density due to inadequate public transport accessibility. Two companies filed an appeal against this decision, which was subsequently rejected by the cantonal administrative court. The companies then brought a complaint before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_414/2025: Decision on the appeal against the rejection of a request for cost exemption and deferment
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ approached the High Court of the Canton of Bern to obtain the exemption or deferment of procedural costs amounting to CHF 1,000.-- that had been imposed on her by a previous decision. The High Court rejected her request due to insufficient documentation regarding her financial circumstances. Before the Federal Court, she requested the annulment of this decision or a referral of the case back to the lower court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_14/2025: Revocation of an EU/EFTA permanent residence permit application due to absence abroad
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, an Italian citizen, obtained an EU/EFTA permanent residence permit in Switzerland in 2010. In May 2018, he applied for the suspension of his permit due to medical treatment in Italy. The cantonal authorities rejected this and declared the permit forfeited, as the appellant had predominantly resided in Italy since at least 2015. The appellant then approached the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_476/2025: Admissibility of appeals concerning enforcement orders
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________ filed a criminal appeal with the Federal Court against two cantonal decisions regarding enforcement orders for prison sentences. The Administrative Court of the Cantonal Court of Fribourg declared the appeals inadmissible due to insufficient form and jurisdiction. A.________ requested both precautionary measures for the suspension of the sanction and official defense from the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
1C_8/2025: Dismissal of a Federal Court proceeding due to mootness
Summary of the Facts
The municipality of Val Müstair approved on July 25, 2023, the construction application of B.________ and C.________ for a single-family house. Neighbor A.________ raised an objection and achieved partial success. The Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden rejected A.________'s complaint against the objection decision. A.________ then appealed this decision to the Federal Court. During the proceedings, the opposing party refrained from exercising their building permit, rendering the proceedings moot.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_217/2025: Decision regarding precautionary measures and free legal aid
Summary of the Facts
The appellant contested the decision of the Commercial Court of the Canton of Aargau from May 2, 2025, which rejected his request for the issuance of super-provisional measures and his request for free legal aid. Additionally, court costs were imposed on him.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_276/2025: Support contributions due to the hardship program related to the Covid-19 pandemic
Summary of the Facts
The A.________ GmbH applied for support contributions from the hardship program of the Canton of Basel-Stadt due to the Covid-19 pandemic. A preliminary decision on the contributions was made and the final statement prepared. The company later submitted a reconsideration request, which was rejected by the competent department. The cantonal appellate court also dismissed the A.________ GmbH's appeal, leading the company to file a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
5A_232/2025: Decision regarding the inadmissibility of a legal remedy after the termination of adult protection measures
Summary of the Facts
The affected A.________ was subject to a placement decision for integration purposes (PLAFA) imposed by a doctor on February 3, 2025. The competent authority and later the cantonal court rejected the corresponding submissions against this decision as inadmissible because the PLAFA had already been lifted before the submission of the legal remedy. A.________ then approached the Federal Court on March 24, 2025, and filed a request for free legal aid.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_265/2025: Judgment regarding disability insurance (process prerequisite)
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court reviewed a complaint from A.________ against a decision of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Thurgau. The complaint was directed against the rejection of further professional measures by the IV office of the Canton of Thurgau. The previous integration attempts proved unsuccessful, and the medically certified work capacity was practically not applicable under the given circumstances. The Federal Court did not consider the complaint due to insufficient justification.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_214/2025: Decision on the inadmissibility of a legal remedy in the matter of accident insurance
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court assesses the admissibility of a legal remedy from A.________ against a decision of the Cour des assurances sociales of the Cantonal Court of Valais from February 27, 2025. The dispute concerns the timeliness of an appeal filed regarding a decision of the Caisse nationale suisse d'assurance en cas d'accidents (CNA).
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_124/2025: Decision on the withdrawal of the disability insurance pension
Summary of the Facts
A.________, born in 1973, had received a full disability pension since December 1, 2012. Following a review by the cantonal AI office of the Canton of Valais, the pension was revoked effective May 1, 2021, as a significant improvement in health was determined. The insured contested this decision, and after further examinations, the Cantonal Court confirmed the withdrawal of the pension. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court against this judgment.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4A_229/2025: Order regarding tenant eviction
Summary of the Facts
The applicants A.________ and B.________ applied to the Federal Court for the granting of suspensive effect against a decision of the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen from April 17, 2025. The application was rejected due to inadmissibility, as no legal remedy procedure in the main matter was pending before the Federal Court. Furthermore, the deadline for filing a complaint expired without any corresponding submission.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_640/2024: Judgment on the accusation of tax evasion in direct federal tax as well as state and municipal taxes of the Canton of Zurich
Summary of the Facts
A.________ did not submit tax returns for the tax periods 2013 to 2015. Subsequent investigations revealed significant discrepancies between the originally estimated tax amounts and the actual financial situation. The cantonal tax office of Zurich opened a back tax procedure and a tax evasion procedure, which led to the assessment of back taxes and fines. A.________ denied the accusation of tax evasion and argued that the assets were encumbered with a usufruct reservation in favor of his deceased parents. This defense was rejected by the lower court and now also by the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_137/2025: Decision on family reunification of foreign children
Summary of the Facts
The appellant A.________, a Brazilian national, has been living in Switzerland since 2019 and has been married to a Swiss national since 2022. In February 2024, she applied for family reunification for her minor daughter C.________, who is in Switzerland without a visa. The authorities of the Canton of Vaud rejected the application, as the legal deadlines for reunification were not met and no substantial family reasons were presented. The cantonal decision was unsuccessfully challenged by A.________ before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_242/2024: Joint procedure regarding the unsealing of evidence
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office III of the Canton of Zurich is conducting a criminal procedure against B.________ and others on suspicion of forgery, mismanagement, and fraud. In this context, house searches were carried out, during which electronic data was secured among other things. B.________ and A.________ AG requested the sealing of this data. The coercive measures court ordered an electronic triage with the involvement of an expert. After conducting the triage, the court released the majority of the data for unsealing and rejected requests for procedural suspension and supplementation of search terms.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
8C_735/2024: Judgment on an accident insurance claim
Summary of the Facts
The appellant, a self-employed cleaning contractor, was compulsorily accident insured with Suva. He claimed to have stepped on a glass shard with his left foot during a visit to the beach in Sicily in 2019, causing an existing foot injury. He sought benefits from accident insurance. Suva denied a causal link between the accident and the health complaints, which was confirmed by the cantonal court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
7B_465/2025: Appeal regarding official defense – Non-acceptance
Summary of the Facts
The appellant had raised an objection against a penal order from the Public Prosecutor's Office of Zofingen-Kulm. In the main proceedings before the District Court of Zofingen, he requested an official defender, which was denied. The High Court of the Canton of Aargau confirmed this denial. The appellant requested the Federal Court to annul the High Court's decision and also requested the appointment of an interpreter and the protection of his criminal record.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
9C_264/2025: Judgment on compliance with the objection period in the AHVG compensation procedure
Summary of the Facts
A.________ filed an objection against a compensation order from the compensation office of the Canton of Zurich, in which he was charged a compensation amount of CHF 28,009.65 according to Art. 52 AHVG. The objection was rejected due to non-compliance with the 30-day objection period. The Social Insurance Court of Zurich confirmed the non-acceptance decision. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
2C_267/2025: Judgment on the non-extension of a residence permit and expulsion
Summary of the Facts
- A.________ filed a complaint on April 28, 2025, with the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft against a non-extension of his residence permit and expulsion.
- The Cantonal Court did not accept the complaint on April 30, 2025, due to late submission.
- A.________ filed a complaint in public law matters with the Federal Court on May 23, 2025, requesting the annulment of the Cantonal Court's judgment.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.
4D_71/2025: Non-acceptance due to lack of justification of a constitutional complaint
Summary of the Facts
The appellant filed multiple complaints against decisions of the High Court of the Canton of Thurgau regarding the non-performance of a cost advance. The High Court ultimately decided on March 14, 2025, not to accept the complaint. The present case concerns the appellant's complaint against this non-acceptance decision.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the Portal.