Swiss Arbitration Decisions

Use double-quotes to match a sentence or a date. Format dates as follows: "month dd, yyyy". (eg.: "february 23, 2007")
Found 340 result(s)
May 14, 2001

At issue in the Fomento case was lis pendens and more precisely whether or not international arbitrators sitting in Switzerland had to stay the arbitration when a state court abroad was seized of the matter before the arbitration started. Fomento, a Spanish company, had been retained as a contractor by a Panamian company, Colon Container Terminals (“CCT”) to work on the construction of a port terminal. A dispute arose. Fomento filed a claim against CCT in Panama.

Case information

Docket number: 
4P.37/2001
Original language: 
French
Published: 
19 ASA Bull 555 (2001)
127 ATF III 279 (2001)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
March 8, 2006

1. The judgment issued by the Supreme Court of Switzerland (“Federal Tribunal”) on March 8, 2006 in the case of Tensacciai S.P.A v. Freyssinet Terra Armata S.R.L will be the object of praise and criticism for a long time. The original decision is in French.

Case information

Docket number: 
4P.278/2005
Original language: 
French
Published: 
24 ASA Bull 550 (2006)
132 ATF III 389 (2006)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
December 10, 2007

The ENUSA decision of the Federal Tribunal, which is the Supreme Court of Switzerland, related to a dispute between a Spanish company and an American company arising from a Marketing Agreement of August 1, 2003. The Marketing Agreement had been concluded between SHS CERAMICAS S.A., a Spanish company, which subsequently assigned its claim to ENUSA Industrias Avanzadas S.A. and LIPO CHEMICALS Inc. of New Jersey.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_352/2007
Original language: 
French
Published: 
26 ASA Bull 322 (2008)
also see 2 SwissIntArbRep 29 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
January 9, 2008

The appeal was directed against an ICC award issued by Prof. Wolfgang Wiegand on September 21, 2007. Prof Wiegand, a leading speciallist of international arbitration, was sole arbitrator and the venue of the arbitration was Geneva.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_450/2007
Original language: 
French
Published: 
2 SwissIntArbRep 15 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
January 22, 2008

The appeal was directed against an ICC award issued by three well known arbitrators, Andreas Reiner (chair), Klaus Sachs and Bernard Hanotiau on October 10, 2007. The venue of the arbitration was Zurich. A previous award had been issued on May 27, 2007 and also appealed. The English version of the opinion of the Federal Tribunal of the same date, January 22, 2008, with regard to the first appeal may also be downloaded from our web site :  4A_244/2007.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_468_2007
Original language: 
French
Published: 
2 SwissIntArbRep 71 (2008)
134 ATF III 186 (2008)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
Arbitrator (s): 
January 22, 2008

Here is a decision of January 22, 2008, which dealt with the somewhat arcane issue of a subsidiary, which was a party to an arbitration clause, but then left the Group of companies involved as a consequence of an MBO. It was argued that by doing so, the former subsidiary would no longer be a party to the arbitration agreement. The argument was rejected (see pages 6 and 7).

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_244/2007
Original language: 
German
Published: 
26 ASA Bull 549 (2008)
also see 2 SwissIntArbRep 45 (2008)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
February 21, 2008

This decision dated February 21, 2008 came on line in late March.  In view of its interest it has already been the object of a short comment (in French) by Laurent Hirsch in the discussion group  arbitrage-adr@yahoogroupes.fr. Laurent's comment was mailed on April 10.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_370/2007
Original language: 
French
Published: 
2 SwissIntArbRep 89 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
March 6, 2008

This decision is dated March 6, 2008 and its object was an appeal against an award issued by an Arbitral tribunal composed of three arbitrators, Dr. Cesare Jermini, Chairman, Prof. Sergio Carbone and Mr Charles Poncet. Since I was one of the arbitrators, I would rather not comment the decision, for reasons you will understand.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_500/2007
Original language: 
French
Published: 
27 ASA Bull 94 (2009). also see 2 SwissIntArbRep 133 (2008)
134 ATF III 260 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
March 13, 2008

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_376/2007
Original language: 
German
March 14, 2008

The case involved a petition to the Federal Tribunal for the revision of an international award issued by Swiss arbitrator Martin Bernet in Zurich on February 23, 2007. As you know, Swiss case law has determined that the revision of international awards falls within the jurisdiction of the Federal Tribunal. The case is interesting because after the award was issued, the petitioner discovered in its own archives a number of documents, which could have established that bribery had taken place.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_42/2008
Original language: 
German
Published: 
2 SwissIntArbRep 153 (2008)
134 BGE III 286 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
February 29, 2008

The case involved an appeal against an award issued in Zurich on September 28, 2008. The Arbitral tribunal (Pierre A. Karrer, Daniel Girsberger and Daniel Wehrli, chairman) denied jurisdiction in part and this was the main object of the appeal. The Court confirmed that an award denying jurisdiction in part is final to that extent, whilst the same award, to the extent that it accepted jurisdiction in part, is an interlocutory award.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_452/2007
Original language: 
German
Published: 
26 ASA Bull 765 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
March 20, 2008

The case involved an appeal against an award issued in Lausanne on October 30, 2007. The Arbitral tribunal (Dirk-Reiner Martens, Efraïm Barak and Juan José Pinto, chairman) constituted by the Court of Arbitration for Sport was under attack in the appeal due to an alleged lack of independence.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_506/2007
Original language: 
French
Published: 
2 SwissIntArbRep 191 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
April 4, 2008

The case involved a request for revision of an arbitral award issued on August 7, 2007 by the Court of Arbitration for Sport ("CAS") with three arbitrators sitting, Luigi Fumagalli, Jose Juan Pintó Sala and Chairman Jan Paulsson. The award was not appealed but some months later an application was made for revision, supposedly because one of the arbitrators was not independent.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_528/2007
Original language: 
German
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
March 25, 2008

Case information

Docket number: 
4D_28/2008
Original language: 
German
April 11, 2008

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_14/2008
Original language: 
German

Pages