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 392 result(s)
August 22, 2018

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_300/2018
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Respondent: 
August 22, 2018

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_298/2018
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Counsel
Respondent: 
February 7, 2017

In a dispute between a Tunisian company and a company based in Germany (“Defendant 1”) along with its Tunisian subsidiary (“Defendant 2”) over unpaid invoices, the sole Arbitrator (Raphaëlle Favre Schnyder) found Defendant 1 liable and ordered it to pay the Claimant compensation. She dismissed all the claims against Defendant 2. Defendant 1 appealed the decision to the Federal Tribunal, arguing that the Arbitrator had violated its right to be heard.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_478/2016
Original language: 
German
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
December 14, 2017

This is the well known case of Horthel Systems BV v. Poland, initiated under the 1992 Netherlands-Poland BIT. Horthel sought damages on the basis of articles 3(1) (Fair and equitable treatment) and 5 (Deprivation of investment without compensation and discrimination). At issue was the (modified) tax regime applied by the host state.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_157/2017
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
January 24, 2017

The case involved a purchase agreement for a packing machine governed by Swiss law, containing a somewhat pathological arbitration clause providing for arbitration by “the International Chamber of Commerce of Geneva”,  yet under ICC Rules.

 
Arbitration was initiated by the Purchaser in 2014. The Respondent raised a jurisdictional defense in addition to its submissions on the merits.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_672/2016
Original language: 
German
Published: 
36 ASA Bull 145 (2018)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
April 17, 2018

In this judgment the Federal Tribunal reiterated the strict admissibility conditions in recourses to set aside arbitral awards, and more particularly, the requirement of a legally protected interest (or interest “worthy of protection”). The case involved an appeal against a CAS award rendered shortly before the FIFA World Cup Russia in June 2017, The sole arbitrator was Pierre Müller, a Lausanne judge.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_426/2017
Original language: 
French
Parties
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
October 23, 2017

In an appeal filed by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) against an “Agreement” concluded between the professional squash Player X.________ and the World Squash Federation (WSF). According to the Agreement, the Player X.________ admitted having violated the anti-doping rules, accepting, among other penalties, a one-year suspension.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_424/2017
Original language: 
French
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
April 25, 2017

While the arbitration itself was born from a fascinating tripartite contract dispute with its roots inthe political upheaval following the so-called “Arab Spring,” the Federal Tribunal’s decision is of average interest only, as the Court was, once again, inclined to reiterate its narrow scope of review on the “right to be heard” (due process) in international arbitration.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_34/2016
Original language: 
French
Published: 
36 ASA Bull 996 (2018)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
November 24, 2017

Two telecommunications companies had a dispute over the termination of a VoIP agreement. Pursuant to a valid clause in their agreement, company B.________ initiated an arbitration under the ICC Rules with a sole arbitrator. After several objections by A.________, the ICC appointed the well known Swiss arbitrator Philippe Landolt as sole arbitrator.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_236/2017
Original language: 
German
Published: 
36 ASA Bull 434 (2018)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
January 15, 2019

The judgement is far more interesting for its factual background than for its legal findings; it puts an end to highly publicized legal battle between Alexander Legkov (and several other Russian athletes) and the IOC, which lies at the heart of the so-called “Russian doping scandal”.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_382/2018
Original language: 
French
Parties
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
May 30, 2017

The dispute was in connection with a tourism project providing for the construction and operation of a hotel and casino in the city of X.________ in the West Bank. There were agreements in place that the operators would be issued licenses to operate the casino and the hotel facility.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_532/2016
Original language: 
German
Published: 
36 ASA Bull 972 (2018)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
May 28, 2018

The dispute initially started between two associations, each wishing to become the sole and legitimate member federation of a country (Kuwait) affiliated to the International Motorcycling Federation (FIM). After numerous requests to the FIM, one party, the KMSC, which was not a FIM member, filed a request to the CAS. The CAS Panel was chaired by Boris Vittoz, with arbitrators Jean-Philippe Rochat and Olivier Carrard.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_314/2017
Original language: 
French
Published: 
36 ASA Bull 738 (2018)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
September 19, 2017

The case involved a final award of 23 November, 2016, issued by an Arbitral Tribunal chaired by Antonio Rigozzi, sitting with arbitrators Pierre-Yves Tschanz and Tetiana Bersheda. The arbitration was under the aegis of the Swiss Chambers' Arbitration Institution, governed by Swiss law and the venue was in Geneva.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_12/2017
Original language: 
French
Published: 
36 ASA Bulle 173 (2018), ATF 143 III 578
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
October 17, 2017

Readers interested in investment arbitration will recognize the case of Croatia v. MOL Hungarian Oil and gas PLC and may also wish to look up the interim decision (equally interesting) at  https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw94017_0.pdf.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_53/2017
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
Arbitrator (s): 
January 11, 2017

The case involved the sale of certain goods between two companies in Turkey and Hong-Kong. A Swiss Chambers Arbitration was initiated and the sole arbitrator – a Geneva lawyer whose identity the Respondent’s counsel considers confidential – rejected the claim in an award issued on February 25, 2016.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_188/2016
Original language: 
French
Published: 
35 ASA Bull 162 (2017)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 

Pages