Publications

Schieds­gericht ver­sus Schiedsgutachter,
Com­men­tary by Simon Gabriel on Swiss Fed­er­al Tri­bunal deci­sion 4A_428/2015 on Feb. 1, 2016

The present deci­sion in set­ting aside pro­ceed­ings before the high­est Swiss court con­cerns the rela­tion­ship between arbi­tra­tion (“Schieds­gericht”) and pri­or expert deter­mi­na­tion (“Schiedsgutacht­en”). In this respect, the Swiss Fed­er­al Tri­bunal clar­i­fied: (i) In expert deter­mi­na­tion pro­ceed­ings, the expert has no com­pe­tence to decide on his own juris­dic­tion (no ​“com­pe­tence-com­pe­tence”). (ii) The expert deter­mi­na­tion has no res iudi­ca­ta effects. Con­se­quent­ly, an arbi­tral tri­bunal is in a posi­tion to review the pre­req­ui­sites of the expert determination.

More­over, the case rais­es the intrigu­ing issue to what extent keep­ing objec­tions ​“in reserve” is admiss­able. While the Swiss Fed­er­al Tri­bunal applies a strict stan­dard in arbi­tra­tion pro­ceed­ings, the sit­u­a­tion in expert deter­mi­na­tion pro­ceed­ings has – unfor­tu­nate­ly – not been clar­i­fied in the present decision.

(Slight­ly amend­ed Eng­lish trans­la­tion of Ger­man summary)