Publications

Nicht entsch­ieden oder nicht gehört?,
Com­men­tary by Simon Gabriel on Swiss Fed­er­al Tri­bunal deci­sion 4A_218/2015 on Oct. 28, 2015

The present deci­sion of the high­est Swiss court reflects its stand­ing prac­tice of the so-called ​“strict duty of objec­tion” (strenge Rügepflicht) by the appli­cant in pro­ceed­ings aim­ing at set­ting aside an arbi­tral award. Any objec­tions that are not express­ly sub­mit­ted and rea­soned will be dis­re­gard­ed by the Swiss Fed­er­al Tri­bunal. Fur­ther­more, the deci­sion prac­ti­cal­ly illus­trates the nec­es­sary dis­tinc­tion between the objec­tion of ​“infra peti­ta” (i.e. a prayer for relief which was not addressed by the arbi­tral tri­bunal in the award) and the objec­tion of a vio­la­tion of the right to be heard (i.e. sig­nif­i­cant argu­ments which were not con­tem­plat­ed by the arbi­tral tri­bunal when mak­ing the award).

(Slight­ly amend­ed Eng­lish trans­la­tion of Ger­man summary)