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)
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): 
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
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 29, 2013

The case involved three license agreements for TV rights, entered into in 2009 and 2010. The licensors started arbitration proceedings in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and on December 20, 2012, the CAS Panel consisting of Hans Nater as sole arbitrator rejected the claim while partially upholding a counterclaim by the licensee.

 

The licensors appealed to the Federal Tribunal and the following points are of some interest in the opinion:

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_93/2013
Original language: 
Italian
Published: 
32 ASA Bull 351 (2014)
Parties
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: