A primer on pathological arbitration clauses in Swiss law
By Matthias Scherer and Sam Moss
In a recent decision issued on 7 November 2011 on a request for annulment of a partial award on jurisdiction rendered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (“TAS”), the Swiss Supreme Court recalled and applied its previous jurisprudence on the interpretation of pathological arbitration clauses (Case 4A_246/2011).
The case arose out of a contract between a football club and an agent relating to the transfer of a player. The contract contained a dispute resolution clause which provided that “[t]he competent instance in case of a dispute concerning this Agreement is the FIFA Commission, or the UEFA Commission, which will have to decide the dispute that cou [...]
The Unavoidability of Uncertainty: One Lesson from the Recent U.S. Court Ruling in Argentina v. BG Group
It has become fashionable in recent years, each time an ICSID annulment decision is released that takes issue with the procedures or reasoning of an ICSID tribunal, for commentators to bemoan the lack of certainty, predictability and finality that this reflects in the ICSID system for adjudicating investment treaty disputes between investors and host States. Some commentators urge a return to greater use of ad hoc UNCITRAL arbitration, or arbitration before institutions other than ICSID, to avoid the perceived vagaries of the ICSID annulment process. Yet commentators often forget that these alternatives carry their own risks of uncertainty, inherent in the national court review process tha [...]
Setting aside an international arbitration award based on deficient pleadings
If it isn’t pleaded, you can’t consider it. That in a nutshell appears to be the holding established recently by the Singapore High Court in Kempinski Hotels SA v PT Prima International Development [2011] SGHC 171 (“Kempinski”). That case saw the setting aside of three related international arbitration awards on the basis that the tribunal had gone beyond the scope of matters submitted to it by making a decision based on an issue not formally pleaded.
Facts and Decision
The applicant (Kempinski Hotels) was a Swiss company which contracted to manage a hotel of the respondent (an Indonesian company called PT Prima) in Jakarta. The Indonesian Ministry of Tourism subsequently issued th [...]
An unlikely mix – the Russian courts, a French cement company, and the 1961 European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration
In 1961, three years after the adoption of the New York Convention, the European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration was adopted in Geneva (the Geneva Convention). At the time, the Geneva Convention was noteworthy as being the first international instrument to refer to “international commercial arbitration” by name. Today, however, many practitioners give little consideration to the Geneva Convention and consider it to be of no more than academic interest. The likely explanation for this position is the Geneva Convention’s limited scope of application, in particular the fact that its application depends not only on both the state of the award’s origin and the state of e [...]
10 Investor-State Awards I Had Hoped to Read in 2010
Last year, around this time, I offered a list of 10 investor-state arbitral awards I hoped to see in 2010.
If time permits, I may do another list for 2011. But, first I thought I’d take a look back at last year’s list and offer a brief update on those cases. Rather, than do all of the heavy-lifting here, I’ll direct readers of this blog to relevant reporting in my Investment Arbitration Reporter newsletter (not to be confused with Kluwer’s ITA newsletter) where appropriate. (You won’t need a subscription to view the articles that are referenced below, as we’ll make them publicly available.)
Without further ado, here’s a run-down of the ten cases from last year.
Suez, Vivendi, Ang [...]
Challenges: Do Institutional Rules matter? The situation after Tecnimont II
Amongst the many issues raised by the now famous Tecnimont case, which we analyzed in our 19 May 2009 blog , was the relevance in setting aside proceedings of institutional rules relating to challenges.
The ICC partial award had been quashed by a 12 February 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeal of Paris, because the chairman of the arbitral tribunal, a well-known international arbitrator who is part of one of the world’s largest law firms, had failed to disclose certain links between his firm and one of the parties’ group.
Tecnimont had however raised before the Court an estoppel argument based on the fact that the arbitrator had already been unsuccessfully challenged before the ICC Cou [...]
