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 36 result(s)
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: 
January 22, 2009

This decision of the Swiss Federal Tribunal of January 22, 2009 involves sport arbitration and put an end to a dispute involving field hockey.

In April 2008 a qualifier competition for the Olympic Games was held in Baku, Azerbaijan. The Spanish and the Azerbaijan feminine teams played in the final and the Spanish team won. Anti-doping tests were conducted with two players of the Spanish team apparently showing positive results.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_424/2008
Original language: 
French
Published: 
29 ASA Bull 178 (2011)
also see 3 SwissIntArbRep 57 (2009)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
January 20, 2010

The opinion issued the Federal Tribunal issued on January 20, 2010 regards the jurisdictional issues in connection with the case of Essam El Hadary v. Al-Ahly Sporting Club and FC Sion.

The case involves a jurisdictional award of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) issued on October 7, 2009. The CAS was composed of Ulrich Haas, Olivier Carrard (a partner at ZPG), and Massimo Coccia as Chairman.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_548/2009
Original language: 
French
Published: 
28 ASA Bull 64 (2010)
Parties
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
May 3, 2010

This opinion of the Swiss Federal Tribunal involves a long-distance runner that the International Association of Athletics Federations (“IAAF”) banned from late April 25, 2006 until early December 2008 for using 19-Norandrosterone. Prizes and medals related to the 2006 Seoul Marathon were revoked.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_456/2009
Original language: 
German
Published: 
28 ASA Bull 786 (2010)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
November 7, 2011

This case was already the subject of some commentaries, notably by Hans Jörg Stutzer and Michael Bösch in the latest issue of the Thouvenin newsletter (www.thouvenin.com).

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_246/2011
Original language: 
German
Published: 
30 ASA Bull 157 (2012)
138 BGE III 29 (2011)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
Arbitrator (s): 
January 4, 2012

This judgment, dated January 4, 2012 and the first decision issued in 2012, is quite interesting and deserves reading.

It involved a Tunisian businessman who entered into certain agreements with some foreign companies. The agreements contained an opting out of appeals worded as follows:

“The decision of the arbitration shall be final and binding and neither Party shall have any right to appeal such decision to any court of law”.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_238/2011
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
June 18, 2012

The case involved an Italian professional cyclist whose Biological Passport was assessed by a group of experts appointed by the International Cycling Union (ICU). They concluded that he had used a prohibited substance or method. Disciplinary proceedings were opened and the Italian Anti-Doping Tribunal of the Italian National Olympic Committee acquitted the cyclist in 2010.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_488/2011
Original language: 
French
Published: 
31 ASA Bull 112 (2013)
Parties
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
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: 
January 17, 2013

The dispute involved a contract between a French and an Iraqi company appointing the latter as agent for the sale in Iraq and subsequently in Syria of diesel engines for electrical power plants. The contract was governed by Swiss law and contained an ICC arbitration clause with venue in Lausanne (Switzerland).

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_538/2012
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
April 7, 2014

The case involved the construction of a plant for the production of aluminium foil pursuant to a 1997 contract. The completion of the project encountered several difficulties and was suspended in 2003, whereupon new agreements were entered into and the construction of the plant was entrusted to an Italian group comprised of several companies. When a counterclaim was filed, one of the companies objected to the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal concerning the counterclaim.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_450/2013
Original language: 
French
Parties
Counsel
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: 
June 9, 2009

On November 6, 2001, INFRONT SPORT AND MEDIA AG (“INFRONT”), a Swiss company specializing in the marketing of advertising rights in the field of sports and the Belarus Football Federation (“BFF”) entered into a contract giving INFRONT certain broadcasting and advertising rights for the home plays of the national Belarus football team between 2002 and 2007.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_94/2009
Original language: 
German
Published: 
28 ASA Bull 352 (2010)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Arbitrator (s): 
November 9, 2010

The case involved a consortium agreement between an Austrian and a German company. The contract was governed by Swiss law and it contained an ICC arbitration clause with venue in Zurich.

A dispute arose and the German company was ordered to pay some amounts to the Austrian company. The German company appealed. While the opinion contains nothing fundamentally new, the following may be of interest to my Readers:

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_428/2010
Original language: 
German
Published: 
29 ASA Bull 931 (2011)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
September 20, 2011

The case issued on September 20, 2011 by the Swiss Supreme Court involved the International Boxing Association (“AIBA”), a non-profit association (association, Verein) organized under Swiss law and based in Lausanne. In 2005, the AIBA and a company manufacturing and supplying sport equipment entered into a license agreement (“the Licensing Agreement”) for one year renewable, pursuant to which the company could manufacture boxing equipment approved by the AIBA against payment of a royalty.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_103/2011
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
May 2, 2012

This very interesting opinion involved a contract governed by Swiss law for the delivery of a production line of certain materials. Ad hoc arbitration proceedings started in Geneva in January 2009. An award was issued and on December 16, 2011 I sent you the English translation of a first decision that the Federal Tribunal took in this matter on May 16, 2011.  A copy of the first decision of the Federal Tribunal is enclosed and you will find here 4A_46/2011.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_14/2012
Original language: 
French
Published: 
138 ATF III 270 (2011)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 

Pages