Latest Rulings of the Federal Court
Here you will find the most recent rulings of the Federal Court (BGer) from bger.ch. For the first three rulings, we present detailed summaries including facts, considerations, and dispositives. For the other rulings, you will find a summary of the facts. The complete summaries of all rulings are available on the Lexplorer portal. There you can configure your newsletter and receive the latest rulings tailored to your areas of law.
2C_143/2025: Decision on the question of deadline calculation and granting of legal aid
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a Spanish national, filed a complaint against the decision of the cantonal authorities not to extend her residence permit and the subsequently declared late complaint against the rejection of legal aid at the Federal Court. The late submission was justified by a miscalculation of deadlines and medical circumstances.
Summary of Considerations
(1) The Federal Court examined its jurisdiction and found that the legal remedy against the rejection of legal aid could be justified due to irreparable disadvantage (Art. 93 para. 1 lit. a BGG). (4) It was established that the appellant could fundamentally be entitled to a residence permit based on the free movement of persons, which is why the public law complaint appears admissible. (5) The calculated deadline progression of the cantonal instance (taking into account the exception provisions of Art. 145 para. 2 lit. a ZPO) was confirmed. The appellant could not claim a violation of constitutional rights, which is why the comprehensive examination is denied. (6) Due to the hopelessness of the application, legal aid was rejected. However, no court costs were imposed.
Summary of Dispositive
The complaint is declared inadmissible, legal aid is rejected, and no court costs are imposed.
2C_52/2025: Decision regarding the refusal to extend a residence permit and expulsion from Switzerland
Summary of Facts
The Algerian national A.________ had been living in Switzerland since 2001 and received a residence permit under family reunification after marrying a Swiss citizen in 2009. Due to ongoing significant indebtedness and lack of integration efforts, the Migration Office of the Canton of Bern refused further extension of the residence permit and ordered his expulsion. After various appeals, this decision was confirmed at the cantonal level, prompting A.________ to file a complaint with the Federal Court.
Summary of Considerations
(1) The Federal Court examines the admissibility of complaints and finds that the ordinary legal remedy for the complaint in public law matters is open. The subsidiary constitutional complaint is therefore inadmissible. (3) The appellant's indebtedness is classified as serious and voluntary, as no adequate steps to reduce debt were taken despite several official warnings. There are over 82 outstanding debt collection notices amounting to over CHF 164,000. The lack of integration efforts and the small number of documented job efforts reinforce the authorities' arguments. (4) Considering Art. 42 LEI, Art. 63 LEI, and Art. 8 ECHR, the Federal Court finds that the public safety and order aspect outweighs the interest of the appellant and his family in further residence. The expulsion is deemed proportionate, as the family bond with the Swiss daughter can be maintained even despite residence in Algeria, and there are no insurmountable obstacles for a return. (5) The complaint is dismissed in accordance with the simplified procedures under Art. 109 LTF.
Summary of Dispositive
The complaint is dismissed, the subsidiary constitutional complaint is declared inadmissible, and the application for legal aid is denied.
2C_537/2024: Disciplinary sanction against a lawyer for violation of professional duties
Summary of Facts
A lawyer (A.________) practicing in the Canton of Geneva was reported by a former client (B.________) for violation of his professional duties during a criminal defense. The lawyer provided incorrect information about possible entries in the criminal record and the financial burden of the procedures. The defense in question involved an appeal against a previous administrative fine, resulting in B.________ ultimately being sentenced to a higher amount. Subsequently, the cantonal commission of the bar decided to impose a disciplinary sanction on the lawyer in the form of a "warning". This decision was confirmed by the cantonal court and was also not changed by the Federal Court after review.
Summary of Considerations
1. (1.1) The Federal Court finds that the dispute is subject to disciplinary sanction in the field of public law and that the appeal is formally admissible. (1.2) Criticism of the cantonal commission of the bar is not considered, as it is not part of the proceedings before the Federal Court. 2. There is free review of the violation of federal law, restricted by the necessity of justification when alleging violations of fundamental rights. 3. The accusation of a violation of the right to be heard by the cantonal instance is rejected. 4. The lawyer's assertions regarding the facts are not sufficiently substantiated and are dismissed as appellate. 5. (5.1) The lawyer has clearly violated his duty of care and information according to Art. 12 lit. a LLCA. (5.2–5.6) In particular, the erroneous statements about entries in the criminal record, inadequate advice on financial risks, and insufficient assessment of the chances of success of the appeal strategy were deemed significant violations of duty. (5.7–5.8) An accusation of lack of independence towards the client was not conclusively confirmed but is irrelevant for the assessment of the serious violations of duty. 6. The Federal Court considers the "warning" as a disciplinary measure justified and appropriate. 7. Other, insufficiently substantiated accusations against the lawyer are not addressed.
Summary of Dispositive
The appeal was dismissed, and the court costs were imposed on the appellant.
2C_141/2025: Dismissal of complaints against the refusal of a residence permit and the expulsion decision
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a Cameroonian national, was initially in Switzerland on a residence permit for family reunification. After a separation and a longer stay abroad, her application for a residence permit on hardship grounds and for study purposes was rejected. The cantonal court of the Canton of Jura dismissed her complaint. The appellant then appealed to the Federal Court, disputing the decision based on various legal grounds, including Articles 3 and 8 of the ECHR as well as articles of the Federal Act on Foreign Nationals and Integration (LEI).
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_1032/2023: Judgment on criminal qualification and expulsion
Summary of Facts
The judgment concerns A.________, who on October 16, 2016, fired two shots with a pistol, injuring B.________ severely. A.________ was convicted of serious bodily injury and multiple endangerment of life and received an expulsion of eight years, which was to be entered in the Schengen Information System (SIS). He contested the qualification of the bodily injury and the expulsion.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2C_393/2024: Decision of the Federal Court regarding residence permits and family reunification
Summary of Facts
A.A. and C.A. are nationals of U.________ and live together with their son B.A. in Switzerland. Due to health issues of C.A., who had to undergo a heart transplant, he was granted temporary admission. His wife and son applied for residence permits under family reunification, which were denied by the competent office and the cantonal authorities. Following these decisions, the family filed complaints up to the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
8F_16/2024: Application for revision of a Federal Court ruling regarding accident insurance
Summary of Facts
The insured A.________ (born 1941) requests the revision of two previous Federal Court rulings (8C_257/2011 and 8F_2/2017) to have the causation of his dermatological complaints recognized as resulting from an accident event in 1987 and to have the costs covered by INSAI. He relies on new medical documents from the years 2016, 2017, and 2024.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2C_87/2024: Sunday work ban for employees of a business in the train station area
Summary of Facts
A.________ AG opened a business in the Châtel-St-Denis train station with opening hours including Sundays. Based on the Labor Law and cantonal legislation, it was prohibited from employing staff on Sundays. A.________ AG argued that its business should be considered as a service provider for travelers under Regulation 2 of the Labor Law (OLT 2). The Federal Court addressed the question of whether the legal exceptions to the Sunday work ban apply to A.________ AG.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_212/2025: Dismissal order due to lack of appeal declaration: Decision on non-admission
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.________ filed an appeal within the deadline against a judgment of the District Court of Einsiedeln, but failed to submit the required appeal declaration in a timely manner. The Cantonal Court of Schwyz closed the appeal proceedings by means of a dismissal order. The appellant filed a complaint against this decision with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
9C_151/2025: Non-admission of a complaint in a social insurance matter
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a GmbH, filed a complaint against a judgment of the Social Insurance Court of the Canton of Zurich dated January 22, 2025. The judgment concerned a decision regarding default interest on AHV contributions and the cancellation of a legal objection in the enforcement proceedings. The appellant only contested a passage in the considerations of the contested judgment before the Federal Court, which mentioned possible costs due to frivolous litigation in the event of repetition.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_4/2025: Violation of traffic rules by using a mobile phone while driving
Summary of Facts
A.________ was accused of operating a mobile phone while driving in Schaffhausen on October 24, 2022, and having focused his gaze on it for about 3 seconds. He was found guilty of violating traffic rules (Art. 90 para. 1 SVG) by the High Court of the Canton of Schaffhausen and was fined CHF 200. Additionally, he had to bear the costs of the first-instance procedure (CHF 1,500) and the appeal procedure (CHF 2,000).
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2C_617/2024: Judgment on a short-stay permit for preparing marriage
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a Moroccan national, applied for a short-stay permit to prepare for marriage with a Swiss citizen with whom he has a child. Previously, he had been sentenced to a long prison term for attempted intentional killing, among other offenses. The application was rejected by the cantonal authorities and the Zurich Administrative Court. The appellant then filed a public law complaint with the Federal Court against the decision.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_212/2024: Judgment on the question of fraud and sentencing
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.________ was sentenced by the court of the Canton of Fribourg for commercial fraud to pay a compensation claim of CHF 300,000 and to a prison sentence of 36 months, of which twelve months are mandatory and 24 months are conditional with a two-year probation period. The background of the case is that the appellant deceived B.________ out of investments of USD 1,371,750 with false statements and deceptions. After the defendant's appeal, the Cantonal Court confirmed the judgment. The appellant filed a complaint with the Federal Court aiming to annul or amend the judgment and acquit him.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2C_162/2025: Decision on the reissuance of a driving instructor's permit
Summary of Facts
A.________, a self-employed driving instructor since 2002, had to surrender his driving license and driving instructor's permit multiple times due to lack of character suitability. Following a positive traffic psychological report, the Road Traffic Office of the Canton of St. Gallen lifted the withdrawal of the driving license and the permit for professional passenger transport in 2024, but not the withdrawal of the driving instructor's permit. The Administrative Court of St. Gallen did not consider A.________'s complaint for the reissuance of the driving instructor's permit, as there was no decision from the Road Traffic Office. A.________ then filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
7B_1055/2023: Judgment on expulsion and SIS listing
Summary of Facts
The appellant, a national of North Macedonia, was sentenced criminally for multiple violations of the Narcotics Act (BetmG) to a conditional prison sentence of 24 months and further sanctions. Additionally, the previous instance ordered an expulsion for a duration of eight years with listing in the Schengen Information System (SIS). The appellant requested the Federal Court to lift or reduce the expulsion and its listing as well as for legal aid and representation.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
7B_6/2025: Inadmissibility of a Federal Court criminal law appeal procedure
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.A. filed a complaint against a decision of the criminal appeals chamber of the Cantonal Court of Vaud, which dismissed his appeal against a non-admission order of the competent district attorney. A.A. claims damages and accuses the accused C. of several criminal offenses, including appropriation of unlawfully obtained property and concealment of private content.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2D_3/2025: Decision regarding residence permits
Summary of Facts
A Colombian family consisting of A.________, B.________, and their two children, as well as E.________, who presents herself as B.________'s employer, applied for residence permits. The application was rejected, as was a later appeal before cantonal instances, as the requirements for a permit under Art. 30 para. 1 lit. b LEI were not met. The subsequently filed subsidiary constitutional appeal to the Federal Court alleges, among other things, violations of economic freedom and the right to equality as well as the principle of proportionality.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
7B_118/2025: Non-admission of a complaint regarding the non-initiation of a criminal complaint for insult
Summary of Facts
The appellant filed a criminal complaint against a third party for insult on June 18, 2024, based on several emails with insulting content from March and June 2024. The Public Prosecutor's Office Zurich-Sihl decided on September 16, 2024, not to initiate a criminal investigation (non-initiation). The High Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the appeal against this order on January 28, 2025. The appellant requested the Federal Court to overturn this decision and return the matter for the initiation of a criminal procedure or for renewed assessment.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
8C_148/2025: Decision on a complaint regarding supplementary benefits to AHV/IV
Summary of Facts
The appellant A.________ appealed against a decision of the Insurance Court of the Canton of Aargau. The cantonal court had confirmed a decision of the Social Insurance Institution of the Canton of Aargau, which rejected the issuance of a recovery claim for supplementary benefits amounting to CHF 26,082. The appellant argued that Art. 25 para. 2 ATSG should apply, even though the recovery claim had been conclusively decided in the previous proceedings.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
6B_1020/2024: Non-admission of a complaint in the revision procedure regarding the Foreigners Act
Summary of Facts
The appellant requested the revision of a penal order from the Public Prosecutor's Office Zurich-Limmat from 2016 for violation of the Foreigners Act (employment without a permit). The High Court of the Canton of Zurich did not consider the revision request on November 28, 2024. The appellant then filed a complaint with the Federal Court, which was also not admitted for consideration.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
2C_139/2025: Decision on the admissibility of a legal remedy regarding a disciplinary fine
Summary of Facts
A.________, a Moroccan citizen, had been in deportation custody since August 2024. His representative, Ange Sankieme Lusanga, filed an appeal with the Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern in February 2025, which was declared inadmissible due to formal errors. Additionally, he was imposed a disciplinary fine of CHF 500. Subsequently, A.________, represented by Ange Sankieme Lusanga, filed an appeal with the Federal Court against this decision.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
7B_178/2025: Decision regarding the inadmissibility of a criminal law appeal due to lack of timeliness
Summary of Facts
The lawyer B.________ requested as the official defense attorney of A.________ the awarding of compensation for her services. The request was denied by the District Court of Sion on May 28, 2024; the appeal against it was dismissed by the Criminal Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Valais on January 22, 2025. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court through her lawyer on February 24, 2025. The required power of attorney was only submitted after the deadline had expired.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
7B_1295/2024: Access to telephone communication with the defense during pre-trial detention
Summary of Facts
A.________, who has been in pre-trial detention since October 19, 2023, requested a permanent telephone permit for conversations with his defense, as he is involved in a criminal case concerning serious bodily injury and other offenses. The Public Prosecutor's Office and the High Court of Bern denied this permit citing house rules and operational restrictions. A.________ filed a complaint with the Federal Court.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.
9C_104/2025: Decision on the appeal against the cost advance order in connection with the household charge
Summary of Facts
The appellant filed a complaint with the Federal Administrative Court regarding an order from Serafe AG, but did not refer to a specific official order nor did it contain substantiated requests. The Federal Administrative Court set a deadline for the appellant to clarify his complaint and required a cost advance of CHF 1,000. The appellant filed a complaint with the Federal Court against this order, claiming that the cost advance order infringed his rights.
The complete summary of the ruling can be found on the Portal.