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 15 result(s)
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: 
October 29, 2008

The Federal Tribunal refers to two arbitrations. As it happens, I was one of the arbitrators in one of the two and it might not be fully appropriate for me to comment or criticize the decision.

Accordingly, I will simply point out the issues the Federal Tribunal dealt with:

(i) Section 3 of the opinion deals with jurisdiction. The interesting part is at 3.3.1.2 at pages 10 – 11.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_210/2008
Original language: 
French
Published: 
2009, ASA Bulletin 309
2 SwissIntArbRep 495 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
November 17, 2008

The opinion is of limited scholarly interest but it provides a good illustration of the “collective mind” of our Supreme Court.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_438/2008
Original language: 
French
Published: 
29 ASA Bull 379 (2011)
2 SwissIntArbRep 535 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
March 31, 2009

French speakers subscribing to arbitrage-adr@yahoogroupes.fr will remember that Domitille Baizeau commented the decision in late May and readers of Global Arbitration Review may have noticed Philip Landolt's criticism of the decision in 4 Issue 5 Global Arbitration Review 30-32 (2009). Whilst appreciating the points he made, I do not fully agree with Philip's view as will be clear from the following.

March 18, 2010

The case involved a French and an Italian company, which had entered into a series of joint venture agreements in a project involving the production of aircraft.

 

A dispute arose as to the modalities of invoicing and costs. An ICC arbitration was initiated by the French company on December 18, 2007 and the arbitration was conducted in Lausanne under French law. The Arbitral Tribunal consisted of Piero Bernardini and myself with Bernard Hanotiau as Chairman.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_584/2009
Original language: 
French
Published: 
29 ASA Bull 426 (2011)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
April 13, 2010

The case involved essentially a trademark dispute relating to the ownership of stock and the termination of a license agreement. The agreement was governed by Dutch law and the arbitration took place in Geneva on the basis of the Expedited Arbitration Rules of the WIPO. Pascal Hollander was appointed as sole arbitrator.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_582/2009
Original language: 
French
Published: 
28 ASA Bull 598 (2010)
136 ATF III 200 (2010)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
November 10, 2010

This opinion of the Federal Tribunal, although dated November 10, 2010, reached the website of the Court around the end of last year. It is quite interesting because it relates to an issue which is seldom addressed by the Federal Tribunal: that of the costs of an arbitration and the arbitrators’ entitlement to their fees.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_391/2010, 4A_399/2010
Original language: 
German
Published: 
29 ASA Bull 110 (2011)
136 BGE III 597 (2010)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
March 1, 2011

Two brothers entrusted the British solicitor Anthony Julius (the opinion of the Federal Tribunal, somewhat unusually, mentions the Arbitrator’s name) with settling a dispute between them. For that purpose, they entered into an agreement in July 2004, providing for ad hoc arbitration in Geneva. They waived any appeal and any rights they may have had to challenge the Arbitrator on any ground.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_514/2010
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
April 6, 2011

The case involved a contract signed in 2006 (“the Protocol”) by which certain shares were assigned by a Luxemburg company to a French company. Litigation in French Courts ensued and in November 2009, the Luxemburg company initiated arbitration proceedings in Switzerland pursuant to an ICC clause contained in the Protocol.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_614/2010
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
December 11, 2012

At issue was a dispute governed by Swiss law between two companies and there was an ICC arbitration clause (1998 ICC Rules) providing for ICC arbitration in Geneva.

 

A three members arbitral tribunal was constituted (Jean de Hauteclocque and Albert Dupont-Willemin as arbitrators, with Guy Keutgen as chairman) and two preliminary awards were issued by the arbitrators.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_414/2012
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
April 15, 2013

The case concerned an ICC arbitration held in St Gallen between a Swiss company and a German engineer. The sole arbitrator, Simon Gabriel, issued a partial award in February 2012, finding that he had jurisdiction and ordering the Defendant to produce certain documents. The award was not appealed.

 

In two subsequent Procedural Orders the arbitrator ordered the production of additional documents and the orders were appealed to the Federal Tribunal.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_596/2012
Original language: 
German
Published: 
32 ASA Bull 335 (2014)
Parties
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
January 28, 2016

The manager of a cycling team, who is a citizen of Belgium and domiciled in Spain, was involved as sport manager with several cycling teams, including in the United States. He was a member of the Belgian Cycling Federation and the holder of a license issued by the Union Cycliste Internationale. On the form he signed was a reference to anti-doping regulations and the exclusive jurisdiction of the CAS.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_222/2015
Original language: 
French
Parties
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
September 20, 2016

As you may recall, an arbitral tribunal chaired by Matthieu de Boisséson with arbitrators Thomas Clay and Alexis Moore issued a jurisdictional award on October 13, 2015, which was appealed to the Federal Tribunal on the ground that the conciliation proceedings under the ICC ADR Rules – applicable pursuant to the contract between a BVI company and an Algerian state entity – had not been complied with. The award was annulled and the arbitration stayed until the end of the ADR procedure.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_524/2016
Original language: 
French
Published: 
35 ASA Bull 703 (2017)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
July 23, 2014

The case involved a dispute concerning services performed in a large development and construction project in Ukraine. Two Cypriot companies were involved. They had concluded a contract concerning the management and the supervision of the project containing an ICC arbitration clause. One of the companies went bankrupt and sought the reimbursement of some payments made to the other by starting arbitration proceedings.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_118/2014
Original language: 
German
Published: 
33 ASA Bull 126 (2015)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
November 4, 2014

The case involved a 2013 contract governed by Swiss law between a New York company and a Swiss company for the construction of a Turkish bath in a Gstaad chalet. As the price of the hammam was substantial – some USD 31 million – the contract provided for payment in various installments and contained an arbitration clause in favour of  the Swiss Chambers’ Arbitration Institution rules (Swiss Rules) with venue in Geneva.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_446/2014
Original language: 
French
Published: 
35 ASA Bull 370 (2017)
Parties
Appellant: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: