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 present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the other judgments, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all judgments are available on the portal of Lexplorer. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest judgments tailored to your legal areas.
5A_164/2026: Inadmissibility of the appeal in child protection proceedings
Summary of the facts
The appellant submitted a risk report regarding his two children to the KESB Bern and requested the Cantonal Court of Bern to order the KESB to immediately review and take child protection measures. The Cantonal Court dismissed the appeal as far as it could be considered. The appellant then filed an appeal in civil matters with the Federal Court.
Summary of the considerations
- (E. 1) The appellant requested, among other things, immediate child protection measures after he had submitted a risk report to the KESB. The Cantonal Court found that the KESB had ordered inquiries through the guardian and that there was no denial or delay of justice. - (E. 2) According to Art. 42 para. 2 BGG, the appeal needed to clearly address the essential considerations of the lower court. - (E. 3) The Cantonal Court assessed the urgency of the protective measures differently than the appellant and saw no immediate danger to the children. The longer-term clarification was deemed appropriate. The appellant did not sufficiently contest the facts. - (E. 4) The appellant provided no adequate justification for a violation of legal norms and failed to convincingly demonstrate how the Cantonal Court had misjudged the urgency.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Court decided not to admit the appeal and did not impose court costs.
9C_32/2026: Judgment on old-age and survivors' insurance
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ requested a one-time recalculation of his AHV old-age pension according to Art. 29bis para. 3 and 4 AHVG for persons who contribute after the age of 65. The court rejected his application as well as his alternative request for a refund of AHV contributions. The appellant then filed an appeal to the Federal Court.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1:** According to Art. 42 para. 1 and 2 BGG, a complaint must contain requests and justification, specifically addressing the considerations of the lower court and stating where the violation of federal law lies. - **E.2:** The appellant's submission of February 4, 2026, is inadmissible due to the missed deadline according to Art. 100 para. 1 BGG, as the appeal deadline ended on February 2, 2026. Moreover, the submission does not contain any substantial additions to the original complaint. - **E.3:** The lower court dismissed the appellant's main request because the transitional provisions for the amendment of the AHVG of December 17, 2021, exclude persons who have already turned 70 on January 1, 2024. This applies to the appellant, who was born in 1953. - **E.4:** The alternative request for a refund of AHV contributions paid after the reference age was also rejected, as such contributions have no legal basis for a refund and are considered solidarity contributions (Art. 29bis para. 2 AHVG). - **E.5:** The complaint does not meet the substantive requirements, as the appellant does not present a specific legal violation but merely complains about the legislation being unjust.
Summary of the dispositive
The Federal Court did not admit the appeal and imposed no court costs. The decision was communicated to the relevant parties.
8C_308/2025: Judgment on disability pension after accident insurance
Summary of the facts
The appellant injured his knee while playing soccer in 2017 and subsequently received benefits from Suva. After relapse reports and further examinations, the case was closed on July 31, 2022, and the disability pension was denied. In a ultimately successful work attempt, the appellant was able to achieve a workload of 75%. The lower court confirmed Suva's decision, against which the appellant filed an appeal to the Federal Court.
Summary of the considerations
- **E.1:** The legal bases of the complaint in public law matters are noted. The Federal Court is not bound by the factual findings of the lower court when it comes to monetary benefits from accident insurance. - **E.2:** The lower court correctly presented the legal bases for the case closure and the assessment of the degree of disability (Art. 19 para. 1 UVG, Art. 18 para. 1 UVG, Art. 16 ATSG). Reports from internal insurance doctors have probative power as long as they are substantiated in a coherent and comprehensible manner, but strict requirements apply to their evidentiary assessment. Expert opinions must be examined for their persuasiveness. - **E.3:** Based on the investigations of the insurance physician Dr. med. C.________, Suva decided to close the case and denied a pension entitlement. - **E.4:** The appellant criticizes the evidentiary assessment of the lower court. He refers to an expert opinion and findings from a work attempt that support his remaining complaints and restrictions and could prove a high incapacity to work. - **E.5:** The Federal Court finds that Suva and the lower court did not sufficiently consider or submitted critical documents (expert opinions and report on professional integration) for review by medical professionals. Sufficient clarification of the facts would have been necessary. - **E.6:** For a conclusive assessment of the facts, there is currently a lack of reliable medical clarifications regarding the acceptable work capacity. - **E.7:** The referral of the case back to Suva is considered a complete victory for the appellant concerning court costs and party compensation.
Summary of the dispositive
The appeal was partially granted, the original judgment was overturned, and the matter was referred back to Suva for a new decision. Additionally, court costs were imposed on Suva, and party compensation for the appellant was ordered.
7B_400/2024: Inadmissibility of a criminal inquiry after a skiing accident
Summary of the facts
A.________, a self-employed osteopath, filed a criminal complaint against the company B.________ SA on January 27, 2023, after she fell and was severely injured on a ski slope. Her lawsuit for negligent bodily injury was dismissed by the regional public prosecutor's office of Central Valais on October 3, 2023, due to insufficient suspicion. The criminal chamber of the cantonal court of Valais dismissed a complaint filed against this decision on February 28, 2024. Before the Federal Court, A.________ requested the initiation of a criminal procedure and compensation claims.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_511/2025: Dismissal of the appeal against the demolition order of an unauthorized construction
Summary of the facts
The A.________ SA, owner of several parcels in Genthod, constructed an unauthorized veranda-office structure on parcel No. 1'810. Despite a subsequently submitted building application, the competent Geneva Department of Territory refused approval and ordered the demolition and restoration of the natural terrain. These decisions were unsuccessfully challenged by the appellant at the cantonal level.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_359/2025: Decision on international arbitration
Summary of the facts
The company B. (respondent), a company controlled by the Ukrainian state, and the company A. (appellant), a Russian company, had an agreement for organizing the transport of natural gas through Ukraine. After disagreements due to the Ukraine war, the respondent filed an arbitration claim. The arbitration court confirmed the validity of the arbitration agreement and ordered the appellant to make payments according to the contractually agreed Ship-or-Pay clause. The appellant challenged the arbitration award before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1290/2025: Appeal against the dismissal of a recusal request of a public prosecutor
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed a recusal request against the case-leading prosecutor Ulrich Krättli, claiming that his statements created the appearance of bias. The Cantonal Court of Zurich dismissed the request. With an appeal to the Federal Court, A.________ demanded the recusal order against the prosecutor and free legal aid and representation for the proceedings before the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1236/2025: Decision regarding the disjunctions of criminal proceedings
Summary of the facts
A.________ is being prosecuted for alleged asset crimes in connection with the management of funds from D.________ that were entrusted to him via E.________ Limited. The proceedings were extended to B.________ and C.________, with accusations of simple and unlawful appropriation, fraud, disloyal management, and money laundering. On May 28, 2025, the Ministry of the Canton of Ticino decided to separate the proceedings concerning A.________, B.________, and C.________ (MP 2019.4985) from other proceedings, which A.________ contested before the cantonal appeal authority. This authority rejected the appeal. A.________ then filed an appeal before the Federal Court and requested the annulment of the disjunction or a referral back.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1411/2025: Decision on jurisdiction between juvenile and adult criminal law
Summary of the facts
The appellant filed a criminal complaint against the respondent for coercion, sexual coercion, and rape. The central question of jurisdiction between juvenile and adult criminal law was discussed, based on the disputed assessment of the respondent's age. A medical expert opinion indicated that the respondent was likely over 18 years old, but not with absolute certainty.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_489/2024: Decision on the revision of a disability pension
Summary of the facts
A.________, partially disabled since a car accident in 2002, has been receiving a full disability pension since 2008, based on a degree of disability of 80%. After a psychiatric assessment and a new evaluation by the disability insurance office, the degree of disability was reduced to 0%, and the pension entitlement was revoked. After an unsuccessful complaint to the insurance court of the Canton of St. Gallen, A.________ turned to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_116/2026: Decision regarding the suspension of proceedings in unemployment insurance
Summary of the facts
The appellant had filed a suspension request in the cantonal proceedings to enable the enforcement of wage claims in connection with the recognition of entitlement to unemployment benefits. The social insurance court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed this request by order of December 8, 2025. The appellant then filed an appeal to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_103/2026: Non-renewal of the residence permit EU/EFTA
Summary of the facts
The North Macedonian national A.________ received an EU/EFTA residence permit after marrying a Bulgarian national and moved to Switzerland in 2019. Due to her final separation from her spouse in April 2022, the migration office of the Canton of Zurich revoked her residence permit. Her daughter, who also holds a residence permit, has been living in Switzerland since 2019. At the cantonal level, her legal remedies against this decision were dismissed. She filed a complaint with the Federal Court, requesting a new residence permit.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
4A_591/2025: Judgment regarding the non-payment of the cost advance in tenancy law
Summary of the facts
The A.________ GmbH appealed against a judgment of the Cantonal Court of Zurich regarding a tenancy dispute. After the filing of the appeal, the appellant was imposed cost advances, which she failed to pay despite a deadline extension. The Federal Court assessed the non-payment of the cost advance and decided not to admit the appeal.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_190/2026: Decision on non-admission regarding bankruptcy proceedings
Summary of the facts
The A.________ GmbH had bankruptcy proceedings opened by the District Court of Willisau on November 19, 2025. She filed an appeal on December 1, 2025, which the Cantonal Court of Lucerne dismissed on January 19, 2026 (after correcting the original decision). Against this decision, she filed an appeal with the Federal Court on February 23, 2026.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_459/2025: Withdrawal from the market of food products and supplementary control measures
Summary of the facts
The A.________ SA, based in the Canton of Geneva, is engaged in the import and marketing of pharmaceutical and dietary products, including the products "Ginsor+" and "Ail noir Aubépine". The cantonal consumer protection and veterinary service (SCAV Geneva) assessed these products as non-compliant with food law regulations, as they are considered "novel types of food" and may not be marketed without prior approval from the Federal Office for Food Safety and Veterinary Affairs (BLV). An immediate withdrawal of the products from the market and their non-distribution was ordered.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
7B_1398/2025: Appeal concerning the restoration of the deadline and non-payment of the cost advance
Summary of the facts
The appellant A.________ addressed the Federal Court against a decision of the criminal chamber of the cantonal court of Fribourg dated November 6, 2025, which had dismissed her appeal against the refusal of the restoration of the deadline by the public prosecutor's office of the Canton of Fribourg. The present case relates to the fact that the appellant did not pay the required advance for court costs despite multiple requests.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
2C_446/2025: Decision on the change of school location and legal aid
Summary of the facts
The school change was ordered by the cantonal school authorities due to the strained relationship between the parents and the school. The parents filed several complaints against this decision and demanded, among other things, the obligation of the school management and teachers to act in accordance with the law. The conflict had significant repercussions for the school and its operations, and resources were exhausted.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_26/2026: Examination of the Federal Court's jurisdiction in a decision of the cantonal tribunal in planning matters
Summary of the facts
The procedure concerns a variant of the municipal master plan of Chiasso, which is intended to regulate, among other things, the site selection for mobile phone antennas. After consultations and negotiations, the Government Council of the Canton of Ticino approved the regulation with amendments. Mobile network operators appealed against this decision to the cantonal administrative court, which partially overturned the decision and returned the files for reprocessing to the municipal council. The mobile network operators challenged this referral to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
8C_306/2025: Judgment regarding disability pension
Summary of the facts
The appellant, born in 1989, registered with the disability insurance due to accident-related complaints in the right knee. The IV office granted him various reintegration measures, including a training course and a work attempt with daily allowances. The IV office awarded him a temporary disability pension from November 1, 2020, to May 31, 2022. It denied a pension entitlement beyond this period. The insurance court of the Canton of Aargau confirmed this provision. The appellant requested the Federal Court to annul the judgment and grant the statutory benefits, or alternatively, to refer the case for further clarification.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_184/2026: Inadmissibility of the appeal against custodial placement
Summary of the facts
By decision of October 31, 2024, the appellant was placed for care by the KESB Region Solothurn in a protected section of the B.________ retirement and nursing home. The measure was reviewed by the KESB on December 11, 2025, and continued unchanged. The appellant first appealed this decision to the administrative court of the Canton of Solothurn, which dismissed it on January 26, 2026, and then appealed to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
9C_126/2024: Judgment on the tax treatment of a property sale under direct federal tax
Summary of the facts
The heirs of A.A.________ disputed the tax classification of a property as business assets by the Zurich tax authority, which had assessed a taxable liquidation gain for the year 2016 on this basis. They argued that the property had belonged to private assets for decades. The administrative court of Zurich maintained the qualification as business assets.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1F_2/2026: Judgment regarding revision in a public law matter
Summary of the facts
The owners of the neighboring properties No. 10963 and No. 10318 in Vétroz dispute the legality of a construction erected on property No. 10963, which allegedly violates building regulations. After lengthy administrative and judicial proceedings, the owners of property No. 10318, A.________ and B.A.________, seek the revision of a Federal Court decision from 2015. They claim that new facts and evidence have emerged, indicating alleged irregularities and crimes by municipal authorities in handling the building application.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
5A_504/2025: Judgment on cost advance and free legal aid in divorce proceedings
Summary of the facts
A.________ filed for divorce at the District Court of Winterthur on July 3, 2024, and requested the obligation of his wife to pay a cost advance of CHF 6,000. Alternatively, he requested free legal aid. The District Court dismissed these requests by order of November 7, 2024, as the neediness was not sufficiently substantiated. The appeal against this before the Cantonal Court of Zurich was also dismissed on May 22, 2025. A.________ appealed to the Federal Court, reiterating the same requests.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.
1C_543/2025: Decision regarding building permit in Maloja
Summary of the facts
The appeal concerns the building application of B.________ AG for the construction of a new two-family house, a garage, and a terrace in the municipality of Maloja. The neighbor A.________ had unsuccessfully raised objections against the approval of the project with the municipal council of Bregaglia and later with the cantonal court. A.________ appealed the final judgment of the cantonal court of Graubünden (August 28, 2025) to the Federal Court.
Complete summary of the judgment can be found in the portal.