Latest Rulings of the Federal Court
Here you will find the latest rulings of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three rulings, we present detailed summaries with facts, considerations, and dispositions. For the other rulings, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all rulings are available on the portal of Lexplorer. There you can configure your newsletter, and you will receive the latest rulings tailored to your areas of law.
4D_87/2025: Withdrawal of a complaint before the Federal Court
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against the ruling of the Cantonal Court of Zurich dated April 15, 2025, concerning a labor law dispute. In a letter dated June 4, 2025, the complainant withdrew his complaint. The proceedings were subsequently considered closed.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1**: The withdrawal of the complaint by the complainant on June 4, 2025, led to the closure of the proceedings according to Art. 32 para. 2 BGG. - **E.2**: The court costs of CHF 150 were imposed on the complainant in accordance with Art. 66 para. 1 and 2 BGG. - **E.3**: No party compensation was awarded to the respondent, based on Art. 68 BGG.
Summary of the Disposition
The proceedings were closed due to the withdrawal of the complaint, and the court costs were imposed on the complainant.
1C_258/2024: Ruling on two related construction matters
Summary of the Facts
The owners of parcel No. 140 in Bassins applied for a building permit for the renovation of a building and the creation of five apartments. A previous permit had already been annulled by the courts. The new project faced various opposition, and despite an interim permit that was later revoked, it was ultimately denied by the municipal authority. Appeals against these decisions and a request for revision of a cantonal court decision were unsuccessful.
Summary of the Considerations
1. (E.1) The two cases are joined and decided together for reasons of procedural economy. 2. (E.2) The complaints concern the rejection of the building permit by the municipality of Bassins and are to be classified as public law disputes according to Art. 82 lit. a BGG. The complaints are fundamentally permissible. 3. (E.3) The Federal Court confirms that the cantonal court rightly rejected the request for revision due to lack of new important facts according to Art. 100 LPA-VD. 4. (E.4) The claim of the complainants that the decisions originally made in June 2021 are valid is not recognized as convincing. Furthermore, the rejection of the building permit by the municipality is confirmed due to inconsistencies with municipal and cantonal regulations. 5. (E.5) The principle of protection of trust and the protection against contradictory behavior on the part of the municipality were correctly examined. There is no violation since no irreversible dispositions on the part of the complainants can be proven.
Summary of the Disposition
The proceedings are joined, the complaints are dismissed, and court costs are imposed on the complainants.
1C_222/2025: Decision on the building permit and the quality for the complaint
Summary of the Facts
The complainants challenged a supplementary building permit issued by the city of Lausanne and the Directorate for the Environment of the Canton of Vaud for a construction project on parcel No. 3980. This involves measures for the replacement and compensation of a damaged biotope. The cantonal court rejected the complaint due to lack of standing, as the complainants were not personally and directly affected.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court reviews the admissibility of a legal remedy freely and takes into account that the complaint relates to a matter of public law that does not fall under the exceptions of Art. 83 BGG. According to Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG, legal remedies must be clearly motivated and address the individual considerations of the lower court's decision; in case of dual reasoning, both approaches must be contested. The cantonal judiciary deemed the standing as not given due to lack of direct impact and conducted an alternative examination of the facts. The measures for biotope compensation were considered legally correct, which the complainants did not sufficiently criticize or justify better. Since the complainants only address the point of standing without considering or sufficiently refuting the further reasoning of the lower court's ruling, their complaint is inadmissible.
Summary of the Disposition
The complaint is declared inadmissible, and the court costs are imposed on the complainants.
4A_260/2025: Ruling concerning protection against termination and contesting a lease termination
Summary of the Facts
The complainant rented an apartment, whose landlord passed away. The heirs and their representative terminated the lease. Subsequently, the respondent acquired the property and took over the legal disputes regarding the termination. The lower courts declared the second termination valid and granted the complainant a limited extension of the lease. The complainant turned to the Federal Court to obtain a longer extension or a re-examination.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_395/2023: Complaint against the renewal election of the church council of the Protestant-Reformed parish Zollikon-Zumikon
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court is dealing with a complaint against the renewal election of the church council of the Protestant-Reformed parish Zollikon-Zumikon. The complainant criticizes the election modalities, particularly the application of a church community regulation that has not yet come into force and the admissibility of electing a candidate without a political residence in the parish. Furthermore, the cost allocation in the previous proceedings is criticized.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
5A_443/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint concerning measures under adult protection law
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, who had repeatedly made incoherent submissions, particularly regarding a "case Willy," challenged a decision of the KESB Frenkentäler, which refrained from establishing an adult protection measure. The cantonal court did not admit her legal remedies, against which she lodged a complaint with the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4A_10/2025: Ruling on employer liability in connection with nitric acid vapors
Summary of the Facts
The plaintiff suffered an inhalation trauma due to exposure to nitric acid vapors in a production hall of B.________ AG, which temporarily rendered him unfit for work. The harmful vapors escaped from an uncovered palladium bath. Thereafter, the plaintiff continued working despite the evident danger and resisted measures such as covering the bath and informing his superiors. He sought damages for loss of earnings, initially suing in the District Court of Küssnacht and later in the Cantonal Court of Schwyz, which dismissed the lawsuit. With a civil complaint to the Federal Court, the plaintiff requested damages and the registration of a partial claim.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_408/2024: Duration of the withdrawal of the driving license due to serious traffic rule violations
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, an event organizer without traffic law convictions, drove in 2018 within a municipality in the Canton of Graubünden at a speed of 104 km/h, although the maximum speed was 50 km/h. His driving license was later revoked for 24 months. The lower courts relied on Article 16c paragraph 2 letter a of the SVG as well as Articles 90 paragraphs 3 and 4 of the SVG. The complainant requested a reduction of the withdrawal period to 12 months. The complaint specifically concerned the duration of the withdrawal of the driving license.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_46/2024: Building permit for chalet in Ormont-Dessus: Dispute over municipal building legislation
Summary of the Facts
D.________ wanted to build a chalet with modern architecture on a plot of land in Ormont-Dessus that should comply with the zone for chalets. The building project faced opposition, particularly from neighbors and a foundation. The municipal building authority issued the permit, which was later revoked by the cantonal court due to an untenable interpretation of the regulations for chalets. The project was controversial, among other things, due to its extensive glass surfaces and deviations from classic chalet features.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
4D_89/2025: Closing of the proceedings after withdrawal of the complaint in an employment contract dispute
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against the ruling of the Cantonal Court of Zurich dated April 15, 2025. In a letter dated June 4, 2025, he withdrew his complaint, resulting in the proceedings before the Federal Court being concluded.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_293/2025: Ruling on the inadmissibility of a public law remedy
Summary of the Facts
A neighbor dispute regarding a building permit in the municipality of Corsier (Geneva) led to challenges before several instances. The building permit for a residential complex, garage, pool house, and heated swimming pool was initially revoked by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Geneva due to a necessary preliminary decision from the municipality being absent. The next instance, however, overturned this revocation and referred the matter back to the cantonal administrative court for re-examination according to considerations. The neighbors subsequently brought the dispute before the Federal Court through a public law complaint, which examined the admissibility of the legal remedy.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_308/2025: Ruling on extradition to Italy
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was sentenced in Italy to 14 years in prison for drug trafficking. The Federal Office of Justice approved his extradition, which A.________ sought to contest before the Complaints Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court. The Complaints Chamber dismissed the complaint, stating that the arguments regarding procedural deficiencies and violations of defense rights in Italy were not sufficiently substantiated, as the examination of such issues primarily rests with the Italian authorities.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_314/2025: Inadmissibility of the complaint against non-admission order
Summary of the Facts
The complainant submitted an application to the District Governor's Office of Zurich on January 27, 2025, which was forwarded to the Cantonal Court of Zurich. This court, by order of March 6, 2025, did not admit the complaint, as it remained unclear what the application was directed against. The complainant subsequently lodged a criminal complaint with the Federal Court, without providing sufficient justifications or complying with the requirements for standing.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_282/2025: Decision on international legal assistance by Switzerland to the European Public Prosecutor's Office
Summary of the Facts
A. The European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) requested legal assistance from Switzerland on February 24, 2023 (supplemented on July 19, 2024). The subject was investigations into VAT fraud (so-called "carousel fraud") and other offenses by A.________ and others between 2017 and 2020. Accounts connected to A.________ were discovered. The Swiss authorities granted the requested legal assistance (including account seizure); the lower courts dismissed objections against these measures.
B. The complainants A.________ and B.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court and requested the prohibition of data transmission as well as the annulment of previous decisions.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
7B_403/2025: Dismissal order and standing to complain
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed criminal accusations against police officer B.________ on March 7, 2023, according to a criminal report. Various offenses were alleged, including failure to provide assistance and abuse of office. The Attorney General of the Canton of Ticino dismissed the criminal proceedings on December 13, 2024. A.________ appealed this dismissal order to the Complaints Chamber of the cantonal appellate court, which declared the complaint inadmissible on March 28, 2025. Before the Federal Court, A.________ requested the annulment of this decision.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.
1C_456/2023: Ruling on residence obligation for church council members
Summary of the Facts
The Protestant-Reformed parishes of Zollikon and Zumikon have merged to form the parish Zollikon-Zumikon and adopted a parish regulation that stipulates the waiver of the residence obligation for members of the church council (Art. 5 para. 2 KGO/Zollikon-Zumikon). A voter (A.________) challenged this regulation, arguing that it violated higher law. The cantonal authorities dismissed the appeal and the subsequent complaint.
Complete summary of the ruling can be found in the Portal.