The Swiss Supreme Court has rejected an application to set aside an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) award. The court held that the tribunal had not violated the petitioner's right to be heard, by deciding, for reasons of procedural economy, to limit its analysis to one decisive argument. Therefore, the court did not rule on the other argument, even though that argument was raised consistently by the petitioner during the arbitration proceedings.
This decision is noteworthy as it confirms, in no uncertain terms, the Supreme Court's long-standing case law regarding the parties' right to a reasoned award, which, as the Supreme Court puts it in this decision, has "not changed one iota" since the 2007 Cañas decision (DFT 133 III 235). The Supreme Court underlined in this regard that, contrary to the petitioner's assertions, it was not minded to broaden the scope of its review of international arbitral awards. The court reiterated that it is not an appellate court: the scope of review of international arbitral awards has intentionally been limited by the Swiss legislator and, as such, does not entitle the Supreme Court to review a tribunal's assessment on the merits. (Decision 4A_520/2015.)
Published in Practical Law Arbitration