Swiss Supreme Court considers revision ground (decision influenced by a crime) in context of setting aside petition
25 February 2014
Authors: Nathalie Voser
, Aileen Truttmann
In a French-language decision dated 27 January 2014, published on 13 February 2014, the Swiss Supreme Court rejected a petition to set aside an award on the basis of violation of public policy on the ground that the award had been influenced by a purported fraud committed during the proceedings. The petitioner argued that, by analogical application of the Supreme Court's case law in relation to Article 123(1) of the Federal Statute on the Federal Tribunal (FSFT) (decision influenced by a crime), fraud committed during the proceedings should be seen as a constituent element of public policy in the sense of a petition under Article 190(2)(e) PILA. However, on the facts of this case, the Supreme Court found that there was no causal link between the alleged fraud and the award. As none of the Article 123(1) FSFT conditions were satisfied, the court left open the question as to whether the ground for revision in Article 123(1) could be relied on in a petition to set aside an award for a violation of public policy under Article 190(2)(e) PILA. (Decision 4A_509/2013).
Published in Practical Law Arbitration
Back to overview