Latest Judgments of the Federal Court
Here you will find the latest judgments of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three judgments, we present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositive. For the further judgments, you will find a summary of the facts for each. 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.
7B_207/2025: Judgment on the Unsealing of Bank Documents
Summary of the Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office Zurich-Limmat conducted a criminal investigation based on the suspicion of a violation of the narcotics law against A.________. In this context, bank documents were sealed at Bank B.________ AG, the sealing of which A.________ requested. The coercive measures court decided to unseal the documents and to hand them over to the Public Prosecutor's Office for examination and further use after the legal force had been established. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court regarding this and also requested free legal aid.
Summary of the Considerations
The Federal Court examined whether the complaint was admissible under Art. 93 para. 1 lit. a BGG, particularly whether there was an irreparable disadvantage. The complainant argued that the disclosure of bank data involved sensitive and strictly confidential information and thus constituted an irreparable disadvantage. These arguments were deemed sufficient for the admissibility of the complaint. The complainant's filing of April 15, 2025, after the deadline, was considered late and disregarded. The complainant criticized the actions of the Public Prosecutor's Office regarding the sealing. The Federal Court referred to a previous judgment (Judgment 7B_515/2024) regarding the storage of electronic data in connection with sealing requests and denied the existence of a serious procedural error. The late sealing was deemed inadmissible based on the objection raised for the first time. The complaint was deemed unfounded. However, the request for free legal aid was granted, as it did not appear hopeless at the time of submission and the complainant's lack of means was credibly established.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint was dismissed, the request for free legal aid was granted, and no court costs were imposed.
2C_367/2024: Judgment on State Liability of the Office of the Notary in Solothurn
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court deals with a complaint by A.________ GmbH against the judgment of the Administrative Court of Solothurn regarding state liability. A.________ GmbH claims compensation of CHF 30,001 from the Canton of Solothurn, as it believes that the office of the notary violated its duty to provide notarial advice during the certification of a property sale. Specifically, the office of the notary failed to inform about the possibility of the deletion of servitudes according to Art. 812 of the Civil Code due to a mortgage. The Federal Court examines causality and other requirements for a state liability claim.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1:** The complaint was declared admissible, as it concerned a permissible final decision in the area of state liability, and the amount in dispute exceeded the required threshold. - **E.2:** The Federal Court reviews cantonal law only for arbitrariness. It reviews federal law freely and obliges the parties to meet a qualified obligation to raise objections and substantiate claims. - **E.3:** The formal defects regarding allegedly incorrect service of the judgment are dismissed as unfounded. The previous instance acted correctly. - **E.4:** Regarding unlawfulness: It is established that the office of the notary violated its duty to provide notarial advice when certifying the purchase contract by failing to warn of the possible risks according to Art. 812 of the Civil Code. - **E.4.3:** Regarding causality: The hypothetical cause of the damage is denied. The previous instance assumes that A.________ GmbH would have concluded the contract even with better advice. - **E.4.4:** Regarding the duty to protect interests: The office of the notary was not legally obliged to independently obtain a follow-up statement from the mortgagee, as this concerns the financial interests of the parties and does not fall under the duties of the notary. - **E.5:** In summary, the state liability claim is denied due to lack of causality and violation of the duty to protect interests.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint is dismissed, and the court costs are imposed on the complainant.
7B_15/2025: Assessment of the Right to Appeal before the Federal Court
Summary of the Facts
The procedure concerns the rejection of a cantonal legal remedy by the Cantonal Court of Valais, as the complainant could not assert a legally protected interest according to Art. 382 para. 1 StPO. The complainant requested the Federal Court to overturn this decision and to examine the matter again. The Court found that the question of the quality of the parties in the context of the criminal proceedings is addressed by the first instance, whereby the complainant has no legal interest in his present complaint.
Summary of the Considerations
- **E.1**: The Federal Court examines its jurisdiction ex officio (Art. 29 para. 1 BGG). It treats the question of the right to appeal in the same manner as at the cantonal level according to Art. 382 para. 1 StPO. - **E.2.1**: The right to appeal requires a current and practical interest in the examination of the contested order. This interest must exist at the time of submission and judgment. A purely factual or potential future interest is not sufficient. - **E.2.4**: The Federal Court finds that in light of the ongoing proceedings before the first instance, there is no practical necessity to treat the complaint independently of the main matter. - **E.3**: The Court dismisses the complaint due to lack of legal basis and imposes court costs on the complainant.
Summary of the Dispositive
The complaint is dismissed and the court costs are imposed.
8C_115/2025: Decision regarding Social Assistance (Process Prerequisite)
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against the judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Zurich regarding a social assistance matter. She requested free legal aid, which was denied by a ruling of the Federal Court. Subsequently, she was given a deadline for payment of the costs or advance, which she did not meet. The Federal Court examined whether the complaint could be admitted.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_496/2024: Dispute over the Degree of Disability in Accident Insurance
Summary of the Facts
A.________, a victim of a serious violent crime, was insured with the Swiss Accident Insurance Institution (Suva). Initially, Suva granted her a disability pension and a compensation for integrity. After another expert opinion, Suva raised the degree of disability to 45%. In a cantonal procedure, the degree of disability was set at 57%. Suva appealed this judgment to the Federal Court and requested the confirmation of its decision of December 5, 2022.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_245/2025: Decision on a Criminal Complaint regarding Non-Admittance and Free Legal Aid
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was sentenced by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich for various offenses, including fraudulent misuse of a data processing system, multiple thefts, and trespassing, to 23 months imprisonment and a fine of CHF 350. Additionally, a deportation order was issued for 9 years. With the complaint to the Federal Court, the complainant seeks to annul the High Court ruling, to return it for reevaluation with the appointment of an official defense attorney, consideration of evidence, and compensation for detention.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_481/2024: Rejection of a New Disability Pension Request
Summary of the Facts
The insured A.________ suffered an accident in 2013 and temporarily received a disability pension between May and December 2016. After a full restoration of his working capacity in December 2016, he submitted a new request to the cantonal IV office in November 2020. This was denied in 2021 on the grounds that there was no significant occupational limitation in an adapted job. The insured unsuccessfully appealed to the cantonal tribunal, which confirmed the IV office's decision.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_394/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint in Criminal Matters
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ initially submitted an undifferentiated filing to the High Court of the Canton of Zurich, which requested him to specify his filing as a formal complaint. Since he did not utilize the deadline set for him, the High Court did not consider his filing. A.________ contested this non-admittance with a criminal complaint to the Federal Court, criticizing the Zurich authorities in general without fulfilling the formal requirements of justification according to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_512/2025: Inadmissibility of a Complaint against a Criminal Decision
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was fined by the Bülach District Office with a penalty order dated October 21, 2024, for negligent violation of traffic regulations (loss of control of the vehicle). The second delivery attempt of the penalty order resulted in the complainant personally receiving it on November 8, 2024, at which point the objection period began. The objection was only raised on November 22, 2024, four days after the deadline. The Bülach District Court therefore declared the penalty order to be legally binding. A complaint against this decision was dismissed by the Zurich High Court on May 2, 2025.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_237/2025: Judgment on Compliance with Deadlines and Objection against a Penalty Order
Summary of the Facts
The complainant was sentenced with a penalty order from the Regional Public Prosecutor's Office Bern-Mittelland for violating the Road Traffic Act to a conditional fine and a penalty. Her objection was filed late. The Regional Court Bern-Mittelland did not consider the objection and confirmed the legal force of the penalty order. The Bern High Court dismissed the complaint against this decision. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court, which limited itself to the compliance with deadlines and the fiction of service of the penalty order.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_303/2025: Admissibility of a Legal Remedy against a Non-Admittance Order
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against a non-admittance order of the District Attorney of the Ost Vaud district. This order related to a complaint against unknown persons after an incident in July 2024. The cantonal criminal appeals chamber rejected his appeal as inadmissible because A.________ did not pay the required process securities in time and the corresponding letter was returned unopened.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
2C_194/2024: Decision on the Non-Renewal of a Residence Permit
Summary of the Facts
The North Macedonian citizen A.A.________ had lived in Switzerland since 2009 due to multiple entries and stays for humanitarian reasons, and received a residence permit, which was last not renewed on July 9, 2020. After marrying Swiss citizen B.A.________ in North Macedonia, she applied for family reunification; this was denied by cantonal authorities based, among other things, on the assumption of a sham marriage and lack of social integration.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_325/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint against a Judgment of the Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern
Summary of the Facts
The complainant filed a complaint against a decision of the IV Office Bern, which granted him a disability pension of 56% from July 2022 and a disability pension of 61% from January 2024. The cantonal court amended this decision and based its decisions mainly on an expert opinion from a bidisciplinary medical team from November 2023. The dispute particularly concerned the determination of the valid income and the resulting loss of income as well as the assessment of work capacity.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_432/2024: Right to be Heard
Summary of the Facts
In an accident on August 30, 2021, on the highway between Geneva and Lausanne, there were collisions that had fatal consequences for one participant. The first-instance court convicted B.________ and A.________, among other things, for negligent homicide and serious violations of traffic regulations, imposing fines and awarding compensation for immaterial damage. A.________'s appeal against the judgment was rejected by the cantonal instance. A.________ subsequently filed a complaint with the Federal Court, contesting the violation of her right to be heard.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
9C_248/2025: Inadmissibility of the Complaint regarding Health Insurance
Summary of the Facts
The complainant, A.________, filed a complaint against a decision of the Basel-Landschaft Cantonal Court dated March 24, 2025, in connection with the delivery of an objection decision regarding health insurance. The Federal Court examined the formal requirements for the legal remedy.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_361/2025: Inadmissibility of a Complaint due to Late Submission of the Appeal
Summary of the Facts
The Federal Court deals with the complaint of A.________ against a decision of the Criminal Appeals Chamber of the Waadt Cantonal Court dated March 4, 2025. A.________'s appeal against a previous judgment was declared inadmissible because the motivated appeal submission was made late. A.________ requested the restoration of the deadline according to Art. 94 StPO, the annulment of the decision, and, if necessary, a reduction or annulment of the court costs imposed on him.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
7B_428/2025: Matter regarding Pretrial Detention and Grounds for Detention
Summary of the Facts
A.________ was detained after previous convictions for attempted murder, violence, and threats against authorities as well as violations of the narcotics law. Despite a psychiatric assessment that rated the risk of recidivism as low, his continued detention was ordered by cantonal authorities for security reasons. A.________ filed a complaint against this decision, which was ultimately dismissed.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
6B_1368/2023: Judgment on Criminal Prosecution for Property Damage, Coercion, and Violation of the Animal Disease Act
Summary of the Facts
A.________ is accused of committing several offenses against B.B.________, including property damage to her vehicle, threats, coercion, and violations of the Animal Disease Act. This includes depositing slaughter waste and animal products in the mailbox of the private plaintiff that did not comply with legal regulations, as well as sending a letter announcing "compensation measures" with the intent to force a payment from the private plaintiff's husband. A.________ partially contested the accusations and retracted an earlier confession.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
8C_309/2025: Inadmissibility of a Complaint in an Accident Insurance Case
Summary of the Facts
The complainant A.________ filed a complaint against a decision of the Insurance Court St. Gallen dated April 10, 2025. The subject of the dispute is the denial of another accident insurance claim by the compensation fund UVG due to a lack of natural causality between the health consequences and the accident event.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.
5A_795/2024: Decision on Procedure regarding Access Road and Legal Protection in Clear Cases
Summary of the Facts
The respondent (B.________) received a building permit for the renovation of his single-family home. Since access to his property was only possible through neighboring properties, he requested a right of way according to Art. 694 of the Civil Code as well as a building access right according to cantonal law (Art. 155 EGZGB/VS). The District Court granted the building access right and imposed a temporary use at the expense of two properties, including that of the complainant (A.________). It recognized a compensation obligation of B.________ to the complainant. The Cantonal Court upheld this decision and considered the procedure before the first instance as summary regarding "legal protection in clear cases" according to Art. 257 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The complainant filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
You can find the complete summary of the judgment in the Portal.