Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fw: [Arbitrage-Adr] Swiss Supreme Court International Arbitration Decision of April 30, 2012

Expand Messages
  • JUAN PABLO CARDENAS
    Acompaño nuevamente el correo con una corrección mecanografica en la transcripcion de la opinión del Tribunal Federal por razón de un error fruto de la
    Message 1 of 2 , Jun 28, 2012
    Acompaño nuevamente el correo con una corrección mecanografica en la transcripcion de la opinión del Tribunal Federal por razón de un error fruto de la inteligencia del computador.

    ----- Forwarded Message -----
    From: JUAN PABLO CARDENAS <jpcm2001@...>
    To: Infosecretarial CAC <infosecretarialcac@yahoogroups.com>; Comité Colombiano de Arbitraje <comite_colombiano_de_arbitraje@yahoogroups.com>
    Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:05 AM
    Subject: Fw: [Arbitrage-Adr] Swiss Supreme Court International Arbitration Decision of April 30, 2012

    Muy apreciados señores:

    Acompaño un correo de Charles Poncet sobre una decisión del tribunal federal suizo del 30 de abril del 2012, en el cual el Tribunal reafirma la posibilidad de que interponer recurso de revisión contra laudos arbitrales, a pesar de que la ley suiza no lo contempla expresamente. El análisis es interesante en la medida en que el proyecto de ley sobre arbitraje recientemente aprobado por el congreso consagra expresamente el recurso de anulación y el recurso de revisión en materia de arbitramento nacionall, pero en materia internacional solo contempla expresamente el recurso de anulación, a semejanza de lo que sucede en otros paises del mundo.

    EL Tribunal Federal expresa:

     “La ley sobre derecho internacional privado 8LDIP; RS 291) no contiene ninguna disposición relativa a la revisión de sentencias arbitrales en el sentido de los artículos 176 ss LDIP. El Tribunal Federal ha llenado esa laguna por via jurisprudencial. Los motivos de revisión de esas sentencias son aquellos que contemplaba el artículo 137 OJ. Actualmente son los contemplados por el artículo 123 LTF. El Tribunal federal es la autoridad judicial competente para conocer de la demanda de revisión de toda sentencia arbitral internacional, sea final, parcial o prejudicial; su competencia en esta materia no se refiere que a las sentencias que vinculan al tribunal arbitral que las profiere, excluyendo las simples ordenanzas o directivas de procedimiento susceptibles de ser modificadas o revocadas en el curso de la instancia. Si admite una demanda de revisión, el Tribunal federal no se pronuncia sobre el fondo sino que reenvia el proceso al tribunal que ha decidido o a un nuevo tribunal que se constituya”.

    Igualmente en el correo que remito hay un interesante artículo sobre el recurso de revisión en Suiza y en el cual se hace referencia al famoso caso Thales, en el cual el Tribunal Federal Suizo invalida un laudo por la via del recurso de revisión, cuando previamente habia negado su anulación, en la medida en que se demostró gracias a una decisión penal francesa que las pruebas testimoniales que se rindieron al tribunal arbitral no correspondían a la verdad.


    Cordialmente,


    Juan Pablo Cárdenas Mejía
    ----- Forwarded Message -----
    From: "Poncet, Charles" <charles.poncet@...>
    To:
    Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 4:49 AM
    Subject: [Arbitrage-Adr] Swiss Supreme Court International Arbitration Decision of April 30, 2012

    Dear Friends,
     
    Please find herewith the English version of a decision the Federal Tribunal made on April 30, 2012. The opinion reached the website of the Court a few weeks ago.
    The opinion is very interesting.
     
    Whilst the names of the Parties are blanked out in the opinion, several reports (particularly on www.law.com) were published as a consequence of the importance of the case in terms of quantum. As reported on www.law.com, the dispute involved the Swedish company Sonera Holding and the Turkish Cukurova group. Sonera wanted to uphold a 2007 agreement relating to the acquisition of 27% of the Turkcell cellular phone operator at a price of USD 3.1 billion. The Turkish group had accepted a higher bid from the Russian Alfa group after contracting with Sonera.
     
    In 2005, Sonera initiated arbitration proceedings in Geneva under an ICC clause. The Arbitral tribunal was composed of Pierre Karrer, Christian Rumpf and Michael Schneider as chairman. Ultimately, after two preliminary awards, the arbitrators awarded damages in the amount of USD 932 million.
     
    Whilst the award itself was not appealed to the Federal Tribunal, the Cukurova group filed a request for revision of the award in December 2010, which is the object of the decision of the Federal Tribunal.
     
    The following are interesting in the opinion:
     
    (i)            The Federal Tribunal confirmed its previously well established view that although not made available by PILA, revision of an international arbitral award issued in Switzerland is nonetheless possible when “new facts or evidence” surface after the award, provided a certain number of conditions are met. (See sections 3.1 and 3.2 of the opinion in this respect).
     
    (ii)          If the facts were known to the Petitioner during the arbitration, that makes it impossible to seek revision but the same applies to the facts that the Petitioner should have known by exercising proper attention and diligence. (See section 3.3.1 of the opinion).
     
    (iii)         The costs imposed by the Federal Tribunal are in line with Swiss practice but they are a source of concern to many practitioners. As you will see, the Petitioner paid CHF 100’000 (USD 103’000 or € 83’000) to receive a nine pages opinion and it also incurred costs of CHF 200’000 to be paid to its opponent……. This is hardly the way to promote Switzerland as the ideal venue for international arbitrations.
     
    The requirements for “revision” of an international arbitral award being fairly germane to Swiss law, I am also enclosing a copy of a short article I published on the requirements for revision. Those of you suffering from  insomnia may consider perusing it during their next flight across several time zones…
     
    As usual feel free to use the translation as much as you wish to. Others can be downloaded from our website at www.praetor.ch, which now includes a possibility to register in order to receive the next translations. Of course, those of you who receive this message need not register as you are already on the list.
     
    Best regards
     
    Charles PONCET
     
    Le présent courrier électronique constitue une communication confidentielle exclusivement réservée à ses destinataires, qui est protégée par le secret professionnel d'avocat. Quiconque le recevrait par  erreur ou n'en serait pas le destinataire, est invité à informer immédiatement l'expéditeur. L'utilisation d'informations couvertes par le secret professionnel est un délit réprimé par le code pénal suisse et toute personne exploitant les informations contenues dans le présent courrier électronique alors qu'elles ne lui sont pas destinées sera poursuivie devant l'autorité pénale compétente.
     
    This e-mail contains confidential information. As such it is destined solely and exclusively to its addressee(s). Any unauthorized person accessing or receiving this e-mail is invited to notify the sender immediately. The use of confidential information covered by the attorney-client privilege is a criminal offence under Swiss law and anyone acquiring or using the information herein will be subject to prosecution in the appropriate forum.
     
    Description : \\localhost\Volumes\partage$\Clients en cours\Etude ZPG\Re%CC%81alisations
graphiques\Identite%CC%81 visuelle\452\ZPG-logo_GE-U-RVB-Signature.jpg
     
    Rue Bovy-Lysberg 2 · case postale 5824 · 1211 Genève 11
    T +41 22 311 00 10 · F +41 22 311 00 20 · info@...
     
     




Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.