Challenge of an Expert Appointed by the Arbitral Tribunal for Lack of Independence - Violation of the Procedural Public Policy?
The Swiss Federal Supreme Court’s decision of April 28, 2000 (Egemetal v. Fuchs; ATF 126 III 249)
In Egemetal v. Fuchs, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court (the “Court”) spelled out the notion of procedural public policy under Art. 190 para. 2 lit. e of the Swiss Private International Law (“PIL”), in connection with a challenge for lack of independence of an expert appointed by the arbitral tribunal. The Court held that in setting aside proceedings against an arbitral award rendered under Chapter 12 PIL, an award may be challenged for procedural defects, both according to the specific grounds of Art. 190 para. 2 lit. a to d PIL, and under the catch-all clause of lit. e concerning public policy. Furthermore, it confirmed the principle that the aggrieved party must notify the grounds for challenge of the arbitrator or expert to both the arbitral tribunal and the opposing party immediately upon becoming aware thereof, failing which it forfeits its right to invoke them at a later stage.
Loggen Sie sich bitte ein, um den ganzen Text zu lesen.
Es gibt noch keine Kommentare
Ihr Kommentar zu diesem Beitrag
AbonnentInnen dieser Zeitschrift können sich an der Diskussion beteiligen. Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Kommentare verfassen zu können.
0 Kommentare