Swiss Arbitration Decisions

Use thefull text search
or/and
Filteryour search
Use double-quotes to match a sentence or a date. Format dates as follows: "month dd, yyyy". (eg.: "february 23, 2007")
Found 8 result(s)
Alleged violation of due process (rejected: no review of the arbitral tribunal’s assessment of the evidence)
March 18, 2010

The case involved a French and an Italian company, which had entered into a series of joint venture agreements in a project involving the production of aircraft.

 

A dispute arose as to the modalities of invoicing and costs. An ICC arbitration was initiated by the French company on December 18, 2007 and the arbitration was conducted in Lausanne under French law. The Arbitral Tribunal consisted of Piero Bernardini and myself with Bernard Hanotiau as Chairman.

 

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_584/2009
Original language: 
French
Published: 
29 ASA Bull 426 (2011)
Parties
Appellant: 
X.__SA
Respondent: 
Y.__ SA
Counsel
Appellant: 
Adams Charles C.
Liborio Vanessa
Respondent: 
Harari Maurice
PDF version of the translation: 
PDF icon 18 mars 2010 4A 584 2009.pdf
Chairman: 
Hanotiau Bernard
Arbitrator (s): 
Bernardini Piero
Poncet Charles
Decision on provisional measures characterized as interlocutory decision – appeal rejected
April 13, 2010

The case involved essentially a trademark dispute relating to the ownership of stock and the termination of a license agreement. The agreement was governed by Dutch law and the arbitration took place in Geneva on the basis of the Expedited Arbitration Rules of the WIPO. Pascal Hollander was appointed as sole arbitrator.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_582/2009
Original language: 
French
Published: 
28 ASA Bull 598 (2010)
136 ATF III 200 (2010)
Parties
Appellant: 
X.__SA
Respondent: 
Y.__ BV
Counsel
Appellant: 
Sivilotti Christophe
Respondent: 
Hauser Jean-Yves
PDF version of the translation: 
PDF icon 13 avril 2010 4A 582 2009.pdf
Arbitrator (s): 
Hollander Pascal
Claim of violation of due process (denied: no unforeseen legal argument in the award)
August 3, 2010

This judgment of the Federal Tribunal, dated August 3, 2010 although it was posted on the website of the Court several weeks later, involved a 2001 Business Consultancy Agreement between a Belgian and a Spanish company. The main purpose of the Agreement was for one of the companies to assist the other in a bid for a liquefied gas storage facility. The Belgian company subsequently assigned its activities related to natural gas to another company, based in Germany. The bid was unsuccessful.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_254/2010
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
X.__SA
Respondent: 
Y.__ SA
Counsel
Appellant: 
Genoud Nicolas
Respondent: 
Sturny Thiemo
PDF version of the translation: 
PDF icon 3 aout 2010 4A 254 2010.pdf
Arbitrator (s): 
Bonzanigo Rocco
Claim of lack of jurisdiction (arbitration clause not signed) – no review of facts by the Federal Tribunal (appeal dismissed)
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: 
X.__SA
Respondent: 
International Olympic Committee
Counsel
Appellant: 
Rapin Christophe
Respondent: 
Philippin Edgar
PDF version of the translation: 
PDF icon 11 janvier 2011 4A 579 2010.pdf
Arbitrator (s): 
Stern Brigitte
Jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal to rule upon a preliminary issue not covered by the arbitration clause
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
Appellant: 
X.__SA
Respondent: 
A.Y.__ SA
B.Y.__ SA
Y.__ B.V.
Y.__ SA
Counsel
Appellant: 
Tunik Daniel
Respondent: 
Geisinger Elliott
Cremades Anne-Carole
PDF version of the translation: 
PDF icon 7 fevrier 2011 4A 482 2010.pdf
Chairman: 
Grigera-Naon Horacio
Arbitrator (s): 
Derains Yves
Perez-Llorca Rodrigo José Pedro
Claim of lack of jurisdiction (dimissed)
October 26, 2009

This decision of October 26, 2009 is quite interesting, because it was not really an “international” case and it involved a matter in which Swiss courts are normally pretty jealous of their own jurisdiction, namely a contract for the lease of office space in Geneva.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_428/2009
Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
X.__SA
Respondent: 
Y.__Limited
Counsel
Appellant: 
Thorens Karin Grobet
Respondent: 
Jeanrenaud Yves
PDF version of the translation: 
PDF icon 26 octobre 2009 4A 428 2009.pdf
Chairman: 
Ballansat Bernard
Claim of violation of public policy (pacta sunt servanda and the rule of good faith) – rejected
February 15, 2010

A Turkish company and a Romanian company contracted for the sale of metal bars. A dispute arose and the contract was terminated. At the end of 2008, the Turkish company initiated arbitration proceedings in Geneva in front of a sole arbitrator appointed by the Geneva Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The arbitrator issued an award on August 27, 2009, essentially upholding the claim. The Romanian company appealed to the Federal Tribunal.

Case information

Original language: 
French
Parties
Appellant: 
X.__SA
Respondent: 
Y.__
Counsel
Appellant: 
Tobler Rolf A.
Respondent: 
Balkaya Bennar
PDF version of the translation: 
PDF icon 15 février 2010 4A 488 2009.pdf
Irreconcilable contradiction in domestic award leads to annulment
August 5, 2013

For those of you who read French it has already been the object of a short commentary by Laurent Hirsch on October 1st 2013. Laurent’s comments were posted at arbitrage-adr@yahoogroupes.fr

The case involved the sale of Russian coal between two Swiss companies. There was an arbitration clause with Swiss law governing the contract and with venue in Zürich under the Swiss Chambers’ Arbitration Institution (SCAI) rules.

Case information

Docket number: 
4A_214/2013
Original language: 
French
Published: 
32 Asa Bull 118 (2014)
Parties
Appellant: 
X.__SA
Respondent: 
Y.__SA
Counsel
Appellant: 
Geisinger Elliott
Respondent: 
Rohner Thomas
Mohs Florian
PDF version of the translation: 
PDF icon 5 aout 2013 4A 214 2013.pdf
Chairman: 
Berger Bernhard
Arbitrator (s): 
Brunner Christophe
Dallafior Roberto