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 10 result(s)
December 12, 2019

These two decisions, 4A_244/2019 and 4A_246/2019, concern the final awards in two arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Rules before the same PCA Arbitral Tribunal (Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler as Chair, with Brigitte Stern and Daniel Price as co-arbitrators), with its seat in Geneva.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_246/2019
Original language: 
German
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
October 16, 2018

First, we must note that we are indebted to Mr. John M. Townsend of Hughes Hubbard and Reed LLP, whose own translations, established in another context, were very helpful in the preparation of these translations. 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_396/2017
Original language: 
German
Published: 
37 ASA Bull 805 (2019)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
October 16, 2018

First, we must note that we are indebted to Mr. John M. Townsend of Hughes Hubbard and Reed LLP, whose own translations, established in another context, were very helpful in the preparation of these translations. 

December 12, 2019

These two decisions, 4A_244/2019 and 4A_246/2019, concern the final awards in two arbitrations under the UNCITRAL Rules before the same PCA Arbitral Tribunal (Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler as Chair, with Brigitte Stern and Daniel Price as co-arbitrators), with its seat in Geneva.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_244/2019
Original language: 
German
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
April 30, 2015

The case involved an employment contract between a manager in St. Petersburg (Russian Federation) and a Swiss company. The employment contract was governed by Swiss law and contained an arbitration clause providing for arbitration under the Swiss Rules in Zürich.

 

A dispute arose and arbitrator Michèle Stutz issued a final award in October 2014, partly upholding the manager’s claim for various payments.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_623/2014
Original language: 
German
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
Appellant: 
PDF version of the translation: 
November 23, 2017

The investor argued that per se  the 1954 Convention would not prevent a state – as opposed to a private claimant or even a state entity – from being ordered to provide security for costs. Judge Kiss disagreed in a fairly detailed and convincing decision.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_396/2017
Original language: 
German
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
December 9, 2008

The decision dealt with the New York Convention and not with PILA stricto senso but I thought it would be of interest to most of you anyway.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_403/2008
Original language: 
French
Published: 
27 ASA Bull 530 (2009)
135 ATF III 136 (2008)
also see 3 SwissIntArbRep 259 (2009)
Parties
Appellant: 
Respondent: 
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
April 3, 2017

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_470/2016
Original language: 
German
Published: 
35 ASA Bull 693 (2017)
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: 
Arbitrator (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: 
February 7, 2020

In the early 2000s, the X.________ Republic (purportedly, the Czech Republic) put into place a beneficial framework designed to incentivize investment in and utilization of renewable energy. When the framework turned out to be even more successful than it ever forecasted, the Republic began to scale back parts of the program, particularly the parts that related to a feed-in tariff, or FiT. It also introduced a “solar tax”.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_80/2018
Original language: 
French
Parties
Counsel
PDF version of the translation: