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 412 result(s)
March 8, 2017

The case involved a labor law dispute between a football player and his club, whereby the CAS (Lars Hilliger chairing with arbitrators, Efraïm Barak and Stuart McInnes), partially confirming the FIFA DRC Decision, ordered the club to pay the unpaid salaries to the player.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_40/2017
Original language: 
French
Published: 
36 ASA Bull 172 (2018)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
February 7, 2017

It deals with the recurrent issue of jurisdiction, yet this time not the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) but rather of the previous instance (in casu the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber, DRC).

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_492/2016
Original language: 
German
Published: 
35 ASA Bull 452 (2017)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
May 7, 2019

The opinion is very interesting since it deals, among other issues, with the distinction between domestic and international arbitration and the exact conditions for opting out of the review system of the Swiss Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for the more restrictive appeal conditions foreseen in Article 190 (2) of the Swiss Private International Law Act (PILA).

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_540/2018
Original language: 
French
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
October 28, 2019

The background case involves the celebrity swimmer Sun Yang, who was accused of an anti-doping rule violation due to unsuccessful attempt to take blood and urine samples during an unannounced doping control at his house and the subsequent lifting of charges by the FINA Anti-Doping Commission.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_413/2019
Original language: 
French
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
October 4, 2017

The case involved an international-level middle-distance runner (the Athlete) whose antidoping controls showed the highly likely use of a prohibited substance or method. Following a provisional suspension in April 2016, the Athlete was suspended for four years. The decision with grounds was part of the minutes of the meeting of the Federation’s Disciplinary Commission in June 2016.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_384/2017
Original language: 
French
Published: 
36 ASA Bull 197 (2018)
Parties
Appellant: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
January 6, 2020

In this overly publicized and quite interesting case, involving the Chinese Swimmer Sun Yang (the Athlete) and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), the Athlete was accused of an antidoping rule violation due to the unsuccessful attempt to take blood and urine samples during an unannounced test carried out at the Athlete’s home in September 2018. Even though the Swimmer was cleared by his federation’s (i.e.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_287/2019
Original language: 
French
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
June 19, 2019

The arbitration at issue concerned a joint-venture partnership between the Claimant, a Turkish company in the energy field, and the Respondent, a Spanish company. The partnership was intended to explore the construction and operation of seven hydropower plants in Turkey and was governed by a series of agreements between the parties, including a Share Purchase Agreement (“SPA”). 

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_628/2018
Original language: 
German
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
July 31, 2019

C.________ had requested the payment of a fee following the brokering of a settlement agreement with a state petroleum company on behalf of A.________ and B._________. The latter companies refused to pay and an arbitration with its seat in Geneva was initiated under the Swiss Rules, before three arbitrators. C.________ partially prevailed, and the Defendants appealed to the Federal Tribunal, citing violations of their right to be heard and a lack of equal treatment of the parties.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_74/2019
Original language: 
German
Parties
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
October 17, 2019

A trivial labor law dispute between a football player and his club was initially brought by the Player before the judicial instances of the national football federation (the Algerian Football Federation, AFF) and subsequently before the CAS.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_268/2019
Original language: 
French
Parties
Counsel
Chairman: 
November 13, 2019

A Turkish company, C.________ entered into a contract with the General Directorate of Security of the Turkish Ministry of the Interior to supply armored vehicles. Its subcontractor, B.________, entered into a contract with an Israeli company, A.________, to develop, design, manufacture and deliver 60 armored vehicles. The contract specified a delivery date, though that was partially contingent on B.________ making certain parts available to A.________ in a timely manner. 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_294/2019, 4A_296/2019
Original language: 
German
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
January 6, 2020

In 2015, B.________ sent out a bulletin on a competitive bidding procedure for the supply of TFT displays. It contained the proposed contractual terms (the "corporate agreement" or “CA”), the General Terms and Conditions of Purchase (“GTC”), and Quality Assurance Agreement (“QAA”). A.________ was ultimately awarded the contract, and a contract award was signed. While negotiations on certain points of disagreement regarding the CA were ongoing, the parties went ahead and signed the QAA.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_342/2019
Original language: 
German
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
November 28, 2018

The case involved a dispute between the world football governing body, FIFA, and a Swiss-based ticket-reselling company (A.________) but, interestingly, this is not a CAS award. 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_338/2018
Original language: 
German
Published: 
37 ASA Bull 716 (2019)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
October 16, 2019

B.________, a Turkish company, and A.________, a Swiss company, concluded a contract in 2012 that contained an arbitration clause in favor of an ad hoc arbitral tribunal with its seat in Wollerau/SZ.. A dispute arose and in June 2018, B.________ applied to the Höfe District Court for the appointment of Michael Lazopoulos as its party arbitrator. It also asked that court to appoint an arbitrator for A.________, as it had failed to put forward a name. 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_292/2019
Original language: 
German
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
October 16, 2018

First, we must note that we are indebted to Mr. John M. Townsend of Hughes Hubbard and Reed LLP, whose own translations, established in another context, were very helpful in the preparation of these translations. 

October 16, 2018

First, we must note that we are indebted to Mr. John M. Townsend of Hughes Hubbard and Reed LLP, whose own translations, established in another context, were very helpful in the preparation of these translations. 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_396/2017
Original language: 
German
Published: 
37 ASA Bull 805 (2019)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 

Pages