Swiss Arbitration Decisions

Use thefull text search

or/and

Filteryour search

Found 4 result(s)

Federal Tribunal rejects request for revision. Facts that were known during the arbitration proceedings rule out revision completely and inexorably

July 23, 2012

This quite interesting opinion involved two arbitrations. The first was a BIT arbitration which led to an award of July 1st, 2009 ordering the state concerned (the Kingdom of Thailand) to pay € 29.21 million to a German company pursuant to the BIT between Thailand and Germany. That award is available on the Internet (www.iareporter.com) and the arbitral tribunal comprised Marc Lalonde, Jayavadh Bunnag, and Ian Barker as chairman.

Federal Tribunal finds Arbitral Tribunal had ruled extra-petita, Award partially set aside

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.

Definition of an Interlocutory Award

July 20, 2017

This decision, which addresses jurisdictional issues in one of the Yukos cases, is certainly worth reading, even though, in this writer’s opinion, it is completely wrong and will only add to the regrettable confusion that the case law of the Federal Tribunal has created in the last few years with regard to the admissibility of appeals against international “awards” and the consequence of failing to appeal.

Effect of foreign bankruptcy on ICC arbitration in Switzerland (capacity to arbitrate)

March 31, 2009

French speakers subscribing to arbitrage-adr@yahoogroupes.fr will remember that Domitille Baizeau commented the decision in late May and readers of Global Arbitration Review may have noticed Philip Landolt's criticism of the decision in 4 Issue 5 Global Arbitration Review 30-32 (2009). Whilst appreciating the points he made, I do not fully agree with Philip's view as will be clear from the following.

Swiss Arbitration Decisions

Case information

Case information

Case information

Case information