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 4 result(s)
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: 
May 30, 2016

Case information

Docket number: 
4F_5/2016, 4F_7/2016
Original language: 
German
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
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: 
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: