Swiss Arbitration Decisions

Under Swiss law, a judgment of the Federal Tribunal - or of any other court - can be the object of a request that it should be clarified or rectified whenever its holding is unclear, incomplete or ambiguous.

This opinion of the Swiss Supreme Court, dated June 10, 2010, is somewhat unusual because the Court chose to mention the names of the parties in the text published on the Court’s website. Readers of the decisions of the Swiss Federal Tribunal know that the names are generally omitted, except in cases involving public figures and this seems to have been the reason in this case as the Appellant was the well-known football player Adrian Mutu.

Following the announcement of a program of incentives for the construction of low-income housing devised by the government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, an agreement between a Turkish construction company, A._______, and three Iranian entities developed a housing construction project to take advantage of the favourable program.

A dispute arose and an Arbitral Tribunal was constituted under the UNCITRAL rules, with its seat in Geneva.

Readers interested in investment arbitration will recognize the case of Croatia v. MOL Hungarian Oil and gas PLC and may also wish to look up the interim decision (equally interesting) at  https://www.italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/italaw94017_0.pdf.