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 38 result(s)
February 29, 2008

The case involved an appeal against an award issued in Zurich on September 28, 2008. The Arbitral tribunal (Pierre A. Karrer, Daniel Girsberger and Daniel Wehrli, chairman) denied jurisdiction in part and this was the main object of the appeal. The Court confirmed that an award denying jurisdiction in part is final to that extent, whilst the same award, to the extent that it accepted jurisdiction in part, is an interlocutory award.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_452/2007
Original language: 
German
Published: 
26 ASA Bull 765 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
August 19, 2008

The case involved an appeal against a partial award issued on January 31, 2008 by an arbitral tribunal sitting in Geneva, with Sebastien Besson as chairman.

The dispute revolves around an industrial complex in Qatar where a company incorporated in Cyprus undertook to perform certain dredging work. A contract to that effect was signed on November 9, 2002. The contract is governed by Swiss law and it contains an ICC arbitration clause.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_128/2008
Original language: 
French
Published: 
26 ASA Bull 777 (2008)
134 ATF III 565 (2008)
also see 2 SwissIntArbRep 323 (2008)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
September 23, 2008

The case involved a sports arbitration in Lausanne, in which two Argentinean agents had been entrusted with negotiating the transfer of a player to the Spanish club Real Madrid. The transfer was not completed due to a negative medical report. The agents filed a claim with FIFA for fees, which was rejected. On February 29, 2008, the Court of Arbitration for Sports ("CAS") upheld the dismissal of the claim. The CAS arbitral tribunal was chaired by Prof. Massimo Coccia with Mr. D.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_215/2008
Original language: 
French
Published: 
27 ASA Bull 114 (2009)
also see 2 SwissIntArbRep 361 (2008)
Parties
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
October 10, 2008

The decision is quite interesting as the case involved work on a plant in Turkey, for which, among other things a bank guarantee had been issued. The parties fell out, attempts were made at calling the guarantee and an ICC arbitration ensued. The Arbitral Tribunal (Dr. Daniel Busse, Dr. Gert Thoenen and Dr. Philipp Habegger as chairman) issued a partial award on April 9, 2008.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_224/2008
Original language: 
German
Published: 
27 ASA Bull 290 (2009)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
Arbitrator (s): 
December 5, 2008

The opinion is quite interesting, as you will see. For one thing, the appeal was granted in part, which does not happen very often and caused it to be reported on the web site of the Global Arbitration Review on April 22nd (see enclosed article). The case involved whether or not a sole arbitrator sitting in Switzerland had jurisdiction on three parties not having formally signed the arbitration clause, in view of an other closely related contract signed the same day.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_376/2008
Original language: 
Italian
Published: 
27 ASA Bull 745 (2009)
also see 3 SwissIntArbRep 157 (2009)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
January 9, 2009

Dodô v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) and World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), to which Hansjörg Stutzer referred in his criticism of the Busch decision, involved the Brazilian player Ricardo Dodô . He tested positive after a random doping check in June 2007 and was suspended for 120 days by the Brazilian Football Confederation (CBF).

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_460/2008
Original language: 
German
Published: 
27 ASA Bull 540 (2009)
also see 3 SwissIntArbRep 41 (2009)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
November 6, 2009

The decision is an interesting one because the Federal Tribunal annulled the jurisdictional award issued by the CAS on June 23, 2009. Those of you who receive Hansjörg Stutzer’s excellent newsletter will have read his comments and the case is most likely to be discussed in further legal writing in the months ahead.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_358/2009
Original language: 
German
Published: 
30 ASA Bull 166 (2011)
also see 3 SwissIntArbRep 495 (2009)
Parties
Appellant: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Chairman: 
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: 
October 25, 2010

Considering the quantity of excellent advanced programs in international arbitration, let alone the innumerable seminars and programs to which we are constantly invited, one would have thought that blatantly pathological arbitration clauses were a thing of the past.

 

This opinion shows that pathological clauses still exist and that they continue to occasionally cause havoc.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_279/2010
Original language: 
German
Published: 
29 ASA Bull 129 (2011)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
January 11, 2011

The case involved a company that had entered into two License Agreements with the International Olympic Committee (“IOC”) for the production and distribution of DVDs in various territories. The contracts were governed by Swiss law and contained arbitration clauses providing for the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_579/2010
Original language: 
French
Published: 
29 ASA Bull 716 (2011)
Parties
Appellant: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
February 7, 2011

The case arose from a somewhat complex web of contracts (described in section A of the opinion). The fact that the names are omitted does not facilitate an understanding of what the case was all about. The dispute was between France Telecom and Euskatel, and the arbitration proceedings were conducted in Geneva under ICC rules before an arbitral tribunal composed of Horacio Grigera-Naon as Chairman, with Yves Derains and José Perez-Lorca-Rodrigo as arbitrators.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_482/2010
Original language: 
French
Published: 
29 ASA Bull 721 (2011)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
March 1, 2011

Two brothers entrusted the British solicitor Anthony Julius (the opinion of the Federal Tribunal, somewhat unusually, mentions the Arbitrator’s name) with settling a dispute between them. For that purpose, they entered into an agreement in July 2004, providing for ad hoc arbitration in Geneva. They waived any appeal and any rights they may have had to challenge the Arbitrator on any ground.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_514/2010
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (s): 
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: 
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): 

Pages