We are happy to report that the latest issue of the ASA Bulletin is now available and includes the following articles and cases:
In his message as ASA President, Felix DASSER addresses the future of Swiss arbitration and the initiatives recently launched by ASA to reinforce the attractivity of the Swiss arbitration market.
In his In Memoriam for Professor François Perret, who sadly left us earlier this year, Laurent LEVY retraces the work and life of this eminent academic and arbitrator.
In June 2020 the Swiss Parliament enacted the ‘light touch’ revision of chapter 12 of the Private International Act on international arbitration which will enter into force on 1 January 2021. Philipp HABEGGER presents the amendments introduced by this revision.
Niels SCHIERSING, the author of a recently published monograph, Earn-Out Disputes, that comprehensively deals with the substantive and procedural issues relating to earn-out disputes, provides an introduction to this topic to the readers of the ASA Bulletin.
Rajat SINHA and Vivek KRISHNANI examine the validity of unilateral dispute resolution clauses under the principle of equal treatment of the parties in arbitration proceedings enshrined in Article 18 of the UNCITRAL Model Law and propose a three-step test to assist courts, arbitral tribunals and counsel address this issue in practice.
Internationally renowned art fair Art Basel adopted a few years ago a disciplinary procedure, the “Legal Compliance Process”, that applies to exhibitors suspected of illicit activities. Marion PARIS and Anne Laure BANDLE explore whether this disciplinary procedure could be supplemented or even replaced by arbitration.
Regis BONNAN provides a critical analysis of the national and institutional rules pertaining to the nationality and examines the policy considerations behind the importance attached to nationality in the selection of the arbitrators and their consequences on multi-nationality.
Maël DESCHAMPS reports on the recent decision of an ICSID ad hoc committee to annul the award rendered in the Eiser v. Kingdom of Spain arbitration on the ground that one of the arbitrators lacked independence and impartiality for having failed to disclose his ties with the expert appointed by the claimants in the arbitration.
Laurent HIRSCH discusses a recent decision of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court rendered on 18 May 2020 (4A_418/2019) concerning the interpretation of an arbitration clause which was found to be invalid.
DECISIONS OF THE SWISS FEDERAL SUPREME COURT AND CANTONAL COURTS
- Zurich, Decision LB190029-O/U of 12 March 2020 [Arbitration agreement entered into by a limited company applies to the partners]
- 4A_418/2019 of 18 May 2020 [Arbitration agreement unenforceable absent meeting of minds (despite clear terms)]
- 4A_70/2020 of 18 June 2020 [No damages for period not covered in prayers]
- 4A_238/2018 of 12 September 2018 [Request to set aside (CAS) award – Fatal late filing of hard copy of appeal to CAS]
- 4A_636/2018 of 24 September 2019 [Arbitration agreement entered into by an entity controlled by the State (Libya) – No extension to State]
- 4A_294/2017 of 25 September 2018; 4A_512/2018 of 19 February 2019; 4A_3/2019 of 11 April 2019; 4A_266/2018 of 27 September 2018 [Court and legal fees in case of withdrawal of a request to set aside an award]
- 4A_49/2019 of 15 July 2019 [Arbitrator remuneration at hourly rate of CHF 500 and of Secretary at CHF 250 not excessive]
- 4A_56/2017 of 11 January 2018 [Post M&A dispute – Earn-out clause]
- 4A_426/2017 of 17 April 2018 [Interest worthy of protection (no)]