Header Image

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).

Download PDF
Published in Practical Law Arbitration

Back to overview


Elliott Geisinger
Elliott Geisinger

Nathalie Voser
Nathalie Voser

Show team

Our International Arbitration Group

Drawing on an outstanding combination of skills and resources, Schellenberg Wittmer’s GAR30 recognized Inter-national Arbitration Group provides representation at the highest level in a broad range of complex international arbitration matters, from critical pre-arbitration injunctions to effective enforcement strategies.

For more information:

Visit Practice Area Site
Download Factsheet