-
- Art. 5a FC
- Art. 6 FC
- Art. 10 FC
- Art. 16 FC
- Art. 17 FC
- Art. 20 FC
- Art. 22 FC
- Art. 29a FC
- Art. 30 FC
- Art. 32 FC
- Art. 42 FC
- Art. 43 FC
- Art. 43a FC
- Art. 55 FC
- Art. 56 FC
- Art. 60 FC
- Art. 68 FC
- Art. 75b FC
- Art. 77 FC
- Art. 96 para. 2 lit. a FC
- Art. 110 FC
- Art. 117a FC
- Art. 118 FC
- Art. 123b FC
- Art. 136 FC
- Art. 166 FC
-
- Art. 11 CO
- Art. 12 CO
- Art. 50 CO
- Art. 51 CO
- Art. 84 CO
- Art. 143 CO
- Art. 144 CO
- Art. 145 CO
- Art. 146 CO
- Art. 147 CO
- Art. 148 CO
- Art. 149 CO
- Art. 150 CO
- Art. 701 CO
- Art. 715 CO
- Art. 715a CO
- Art. 734f CO
- Art. 785 CO
- Art. 786 CO
- Art. 787 CO
- Art. 788 CO
- Transitional provisions to the revision of the Stock Corporation Act of June 19, 2020
- Art. 808c CO
-
- Art. 2 PRA
- Art. 3 PRA
- Art. 4 PRA
- Art. 6 PRA
- Art. 10 PRA
- Art. 10a PRA
- Art. 11 PRA
- Art. 12 PRA
- Art. 13 PRA
- Art. 14 PRA
- Art. 15 PRA
- Art. 16 PRA
- Art. 17 PRA
- Art. 19 PRA
- Art. 20 PRA
- Art. 21 PRA
- Art. 22 PRA
- Art. 23 PRA
- Art. 24 PRA
- Art. 25 PRA
- Art. 26 PRA
- Art. 27 PRA
- Art. 29 PRA
- Art. 30 PRA
- Art. 31 PRA
- Art. 32 PRA
- Art. 32a PRA
- Art. 33 PRA
- Art. 34 PRA
- Art. 35 PRA
- Art. 36 PRA
- Art. 37 PRA
- Art. 38 PRA
- Art. 39 PRA
- Art. 40 PRA
- Art. 41 PRA
- Art. 42 PRA
- Art. 43 PRA
- Art. 44 PRA
- Art. 45 PRA
- Art. 46 PRA
- Art. 47 PRA
- Art. 48 PRA
- Art. 49 PRA
- Art. 50 PRA
- Art. 51 PRA
- Art. 52 PRA
- Art. 53 PRA
- Art. 54 PRA
- Art. 55 PRA
- Art. 56 PRA
- Art. 57 PRA
- Art. 58 PRA
- Art. 59a PRA
- Art. 59b PRA
- Art. 59c PRA
- Art. 62 PRA
- Art. 63 PRA
- Art. 67 PRA
- Art. 67a PRA
- Art. 67b PRA
- Art. 75 PRA
- Art. 75a PRA
- Art. 76 PRA
- Art. 76a PRA
- Art. 90 PRA
-
- Vorb. zu Art. 1 FADP
- Art. 1 FADP
- Art. 2 FADP
- Art. 3 FADP
- Art. 5 lit. f und g FADP
- Art. 6 Abs. 6 and 7 FADP
- Art. 7 FADP
- Art. 10 FADP
- Art. 11 FADP
- Art. 12 FADP
- Art. 14 FADP
- Art. 15 FADP
- Art. 19 FADP
- Art. 20 FADP
- Art. 22 FADP
- Art. 23 FADP
- Art. 25 FADP
- Art. 26 FADP
- Art. 27 FADP
- Art. 31 para. 2 lit. e FADP
- Art. 33 FADP
- Art. 34 FADP
- Art. 35 FADP
- Art. 38 FADP
- Art. 39 FADP
- Art. 40 FADP
- Art. 41 FADP
- Art. 42 FADP
- Art. 43 FADP
- Art. 44 FADP
- Art. 44a FADP
- Art. 45 FADP
- Art. 46 FADP
- Art. 47 FADP
- Art. 47a FADP
- Art. 48 FADP
- Art. 49 FADP
- Art. 50 FADP
- Art. 51 FADP
- Art. 54 FADP
- Art. 57 FADP
- Art. 58 FADP
- Art. 60 FADP
- Art. 61 FADP
- Art. 62 FADP
- Art. 63 FADP
- Art. 64 FADP
- Art. 65 FADP
- Art. 66 FADP
- Art. 67 FADP
- Art. 69 FADP
- Art. 72 FADP
- Art. 72a FADP
-
- Art. 2 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 3 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 4 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 5 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 6 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 7 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 8 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 9 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 11 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 12 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 25 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 29 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 32 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 33 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 34 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
FEDERAL CONSTITUTION
CODE OF OBLIGATIONS
FEDERAL LAW ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW
LUGANO CONVENTION
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE
FEDERAL ACT ON POLITICAL RIGHTS
CIVIL CODE
FEDERAL ACT ON CARTELS AND OTHER RESTRAINTS OF COMPETITION
FEDERAL ACT ON INTERNATIONAL MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
DEBT ENFORCEMENT AND BANKRUPTCY ACT
FEDERAL ACT ON DATA PROTECTION
SWISS CRIMINAL CODE
CYBERCRIME CONVENTION
- I. Arbitration as an Alternative Dispute Resolution Method
- II. Terminology
- III. Domestic Arbitration in the CPC
- Bibliography
- Materials
I. Arbitration as an Alternative Dispute Resolution Method
1 Arbitration is systematically subsumed under the term Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), but this is questioned by some of the doctrine. In contrast to a state court, arbitration cannot be conclusively classified because it presupposes two contradictory characteristics. On the one hand, the parties to the dispute conclude their arbitration agreements on a voluntary basis, while on the other hand they explicitly undertake to participate in the arbitration proceedings. It is precisely this combination of voluntary and obligatory initiative that has the advantage that arbitration proceedings can be agilely directed towards an amicable solution.
2 The prevailing view is that arbitration is a hybrid legal institution sui generis because it combines the two opposing elements. In other words, it is characterized as a procedural institution with elements of contract law. In arbitration, the parties to the dispute typically appoint a third party who, in his or her function as arbitrator, not only conducts the arbitration proceedings (as is the case in mediation or ADR proceedings), but who also exercises binding decision-making power over the entire dispute. In the case of commercial disputes, there is a clear trend away from state jurisdiction to private jurisdiction, as globalized corporations mostly prefer arbitration to settle their commercial disputes in private.
A. Common Arguments in Favor of Arbitration
3 Arbitration is characterized primarily by professionally tailored procedures. In addition, the recognition and enforcement of awards from domestic arbitration is guaranteed by the CPC and from international arbitration in almost all countries of the world by the New York Convention. Another advantage is the free choice of the arbitration panel in order to appoint arbitrators with the best qualified expertise. Moreover, the secrecy or confidentiality of the contents of the proceedings (Art. 44 para. 1 and 2 Swiss Rules 2021; Art. 8 Appendix I - Statutes of the International Court of Arbitration) is important, because this can save the delicate business relationship for the future and also protect it from reputational damage. Recently, however, there has been a tendency to promote transparency by publishing the arbitral awards - provided that the parties explicitly agree to the publication (Art. 44 para. 3 Swiss Rules 2021; Art. 34 para. 5 UAR).
4 In principle, arbitration is considered to be time and cost efficient compared to state court judgments. Although high lump-sum costs are to be expected for recourse to the arbitral tribunal, this statement must be put into perspective: It is true that the costs of litigation before state courts can be considerably lower in first instance proceedings than in arbitration proceedings - especially when the amount in dispute is up to CHF 30,000 and the simplified procedure applies (Art. 243 et seq. CPC). However, if the amount in dispute is higher, and especially if it can be assumed that the decision will be appealed to the courts of appeal, the costs of the proceedings before the arbitral tribunal are effectively less significant than the total costs in the state court proceedings. Furthermore, it should be noted that according to Art. 380 CPC, needy parties are not granted free legal assistance in arbitration proceedings and therefore both parties are obliged to advance or bear the costs of the arbitration proceedings, even if their financial situation is difficult.
5 Finally, the arbitration courts also relieve the state courts. In return, efficient international agreements, such as the New York Convention, are ratified, which in turn can strengthen arbitration.
B. Historical Development
6 It is impossible to determine with certainty when and where arbitration got its start, precisely because arbitration is rather considered the universal archetype of dispute resolution. Commercial disputes were already settled by arbitration in ancient times. These first forms of arbitration continued to evolve throughout the Middle Ages with the emergence of trade across the seas and through the colonial era into modern times. With globalization, trade associations and chambers of commerce have also grown, promoting access for cross-regional or international trade, not least by ensuring efficient arbitration rules. They specialized their services and today offer their members tailor-made arbitration and mediation procedures.
7 Arbitration, especially ad hoc arbitration, also has a long tradition in Switzerland, which can be traced back to the Middle Ages. The Canton of Geneva had codified arbitration law as early as 1819, and subsequently various German-speaking Swiss cantons also included provisions on arbitration in their civil procedure codes. With the Concordat of March 27, 1969 on Arbitration (KSG), all cantons then joined a uniform internal arbitration law. Finally, this concordat was superseded or replaced by the CPC, which came into force on January 1, 2011. It should also be noted that the Chambers of Commerce of the cantons of Basel, Bern, Geneva, Neuchâtel, Ticino, Vaud and Zurich had already drawn up additional joint arbitration rules - the Swiss Rules of International Arbitration - in 2004. The revised version of the Swiss Rules entered into force on June 1, 2021 (hereinafter: Swiss Rules 2021).
II. Terminology
A. Definitions
8 An arbitral tribunal may be defined as "a body of arbitrators established by the parties to render binding decisions on disputes in lieu of the state courts normally having jurisdiction." Arbitral tribunals are thus private courts for civil disputes designed by private or public entities and may be invoked by the parties to the dispute pursuant to a memorandum of understanding agreed upon in private. Specifically, one arbitrator or a panel of several arbitrators is appointed in each case to arbitrate a dispute between the private parties and to settle it by means of a bindingly rendered and enforceable judgment.
9 Arbitration lacks an actual definition laid down in the law. Rather, it is presupposed, as it were, by the provisions on procedure and arbitrability (Art. 353 et seq. CPC and Art. 176 et seq. PILA). "Arbitration is first and foremost a contractual creation whose objective is to present a neutral framework for the settlement of a dispute in accordance with the will of the parties."
1. Institutional Arbitration
10 Switzerland has played a leading role in the institutionalization of international arbitration. Founded by the Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Basel, Bern, Geneva, Lausanne, Lugano, Lucerne (Central Switzerland), Neuchâtel and Zurich, the Swiss Arbitration Centre formerly Swiss Chambers' Arbitration Institution (SCAI), offers international and domestic arbitration. But other important arbitration institutions are also based in Switzerland, e.g. the Arbitration and Mediation Center of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) based in Geneva, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne, the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Geneva, the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) also in Geneva and the Claims Resolution Tribunal for Dormant Accounts (CRT) in Zurich. For domestic arbitration, the latter arbitral institutions are of little relevance, as they tend to specialize in international matters.
11 For international matters, the choice of arbitral institution is of great importance. Renowned arbitration institutions such as the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) based in Paris, the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) based in London or the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) based in Beijing are often used. However, in order to settle disputes within the framework of domestic arbitration, it must be remembered that the seat of the arbitral tribunal must be in Switzerland (Art. 353 para. 1 CPC). However, the seat of the arbitral institution is not the same as the seat of the arbitral tribunal, since the latter can usually be freely chosen by the parties (Art. 355 para. 1 CPC; see also Art. 17 Swiss Rules 2021; Art. 18 ICC Rules of Arbitration; Art. 18 UAR). Thus, in principle, arbitral institutions located abroad may also be called upon for domestic arbitration proceedings.
12 Institutional arbitration tribunals offer professional services and also assume certain tasks in the administration of the proceedings. Often, as part of the administrative services, the arbitral institutions also take control of the approved budgets and charge the running costs on the basis of standardized tariffs. The parties to the dispute make use of this administrative support already in the preparatory phase of the proceedings. This can be particularly useful when appointing the arbitral tribunal, for example, to guarantee a mutually acceptable choice of arbitrator.
13 Important advantages of institutional arbitration are customer-oriented administration and constructive support of the arbitration proceedings. It is also advisable to have professional support in the event that the proceedings stall because the parties to the dispute are unable to reach agreement on sensitive issues. In this way, the parties to the dispute can be accompanied in their own search for consensus, even on a selective basis as needed. In concrete terms, the aim is to mediate the dispute in a goal-oriented manner and to ensure that the dispute is resolved as amicably as possible, so that there is no need to refer the matter to the public courts.
14 Institutional arbitration courts also draw up the rules of procedure, which are of great importance in practice, as they can control or safeguard the course of the proceedings in a targeted manner. The parties, who decide to appeal to an existing arbitration institution, usually also submit to the corresponding arbitration rules or their procedural rules.
2. Ad Hoc Arbitration
15 Ad hoc arbitration is the most common form of dispute resolution. The ad hoc arbitration courts are called in the context of an arbitration agreement and especially for such disputes that do not require administration by an arbitration institution. In this case, the parties to the dispute first appoint the desired arbitrator or arbitration panel to whom they wish to entrust the dispute resolution. At the end of the proceedings, the arbitral tribunal is dissolved again. An ad hoc arbitration court administers itself and does not require institutional administration, which can save time and money in individual cases. However, there is no conclusive answer to the question of whether institutional or ad hoc arbitration is more cost-effective, because the costs are primarily caused by the course of the proceedings themselves and not by the administrative service.
16 Ad hoc arbitration proceedings are touted as particularly flexible because the proceedings can be advantageously adapted to their situational course. It can be proactively steered toward consensual dispute resolution by the parties or the arbitral tribunal in advance or only when a dispute is pending. Also, the ad hoc process is advantageous because it offers more comprehensive confidentiality or secrecy. This is the case because it is not administered by third parties - as in the institutional procedure - but by the persons already involved and the circle of informed persons - who must, for example, maintain an industrial secret - is limited.
17 Flexibility can have a disadvantage, especially if the arbitration clause has not been formulated clearly enough. This is because ad hoc arbitration tribunals constitute themselves independently and - without the structuring assistance of an arbitral institution - run a greater risk of delaying the proceedings. The efficiency of this immediate procedure also depends directly on the constructive cooperation or the ability to compromise of the parties to the dispute. In addition, there is the risk that state courts at the seat of the arbitral tribunal may be called upon to provide the necessary assistance, which may negate some of the advantages such as cost efficiency and confidentiality. Finally, arbitral tribunals in ad hoc proceedings perform their administrative tasks completely independently - i.e. without resorting to institutional services - and are thus comparatively more burdened.
B. Delimitations
1. International and Domestic Arbitration
18 Swiss arbitration has a dualistic structure in the legal system: First, the rules on domestic arbitration are set forth in Part 3 of the CPC (Art. 353-397 CPC) and, second, those on international arbitration are set forth under Chapter 12 of the PILA (Art. 176-194 PILA). National arbitration under the CPC can only be applied if all parties to the dispute have their seat or domicile in Switzerland when the arbitration agreement is concluded and the seat of the arbitral tribunal is in Switzerland (Art. 353 para. 1 CPC in conjunction with Art. 176 para. 1 PILA). International arbitration under the PILA applies if one of the parties has its seat or domicile outside Switzerland (Art. 176 para. 1 PILA). However, the parties to the dispute are free to apply Art. 176 et seq. PILA also for internal cases, provided that they have so agreed.
2. Arbitration versus conciliation and mediation
19 Both conciliation and mediation are subsumed under ADR by their design. Both methods aim to support the parties as constructively as possible in their dispute resolution process so that they can settle their dispute amicably themselves, and not to arbitrate the dispute on their behalf. These ADR procedures also offer greater freedom of design than arbitration courts, which allows the mediator or arbitrator to find agile situational solutions with the parties to the dispute. If a conciliation or mediation procedure has been successful, the agreement is recorded in a contract. This contract can then lead to a settlement decision, which ultimately has consequences similar to a judgment. Arbitration proceedings, on the other hand, end with a judgment. If a conciliation or mediation procedure ends without results, the parties to the dispute can consider further arbitration methods. Thus, the binding nature is considered a qualifying feature that distinguishes arbitration from mediation and conciliation, whereas arbitration courts - like state courts - impose one on the parties. In other words, mediators or arbitrators propose a solution to the disputing parties, while arbitration courts - like state courts - render a binding judgment.
3. Arbitration versus Arbitrator's Opinion
20 The arbitrator's opinion is an independent procedural instance. According to Art. 189 CPC, the parties to a dispute may formally agree to obtain an arbitrator's expert opinion on disputed factual and closely related legal issues from one or more expert third parties who are neither involved in the dispute resolution nor asked to settle the disputed case. Rather, these independent arbitrators are charged with clarifying legally relevant facts or making binding decisions on individual elements of a legal dispute. In contrast, arbitral tribunals settle disputes authoritatively, which includes the answering of factual and legal questions as well as the decision on the claim (incl. adjucation), while arbitral expert opinions are primarily obtained to determine the legally relevant facts for the attention of the parties and, under certain circumstances, an (arbitral) court.
21 In contrast to an authoritative arbitral tribunal, the parties to the dispute can agree to request an arbitral opinion, provided that the body called upon has this far-reaching right of review. It is also important to distinguish whether an expert called in is commissioned to assess only individual decision elements of the dispute or whether he or she is to assess it in a binding manner - i.e. instead of the competent court. In practice, the parties to the dispute delegate their technical issues to specifically qualified arbitrators in advance, whereas they then call upon an arbitral tribunal for the actual settlement of the dispute. Unlike the arbitral award, the arbitral award is not directly enforceable, but must be enforced by means of a court decision.
22 Although the arbitrator's award is only occasionally requested in Switzerland, it offers an advantageous alternative method of putting certain facts in an ongoing or pending lawsuit out of dispute from the outset: Specifically, it helps to preventively defuse or eliminate elements of dispute by efficiently and emotionlessly clarifying specific legally relevant facts in advance. In this way, a hopeless lawsuit can be prevented or put on hold.
III. Domestic Arbitration in the CPC
23 The 3rd part of the CPC has an independent nature and - even though concepts of classical civil procedure law are certainly adopted - it should in principle be applied like an independent law. The regulations for state courts cannot be used to fill the gaps in domestic arbitration. Because the former Concordat on Arbitration (KSG) was suitable for domestic courts, it also served as a basis for Part 3 of the CPC and thus the proven doctrine as well as the confessed advantages in practice can continue to exist.
A. Arbitrability
1. Principle of Arbitrability
24 Arbitration courts cannot arbitrate all arbitrary disputes, because according to Art. 354 CPC, only disputes over which the disputing parties can freely dispose are considered arbitrable. In addition to the classic commercial arbitration and the intra-association dispute resolution courts (sports arbitration), labor, construction or inheritance disputes can also be adjudicated by an arbitration court within certain limits. Of particular practical importance is institutionalized arbitration in labor law (for disputes under individual or collective labor law), which is based on arbitration clauses in collective labor agreements (CLA).
2. Arbitration in labor law
25 It follows from the prohibition of waiver under employment law pursuant to Art. 341 para. 1 CO that claims under Art. 361 as well as 362 CO cannot be freely disposed of. Thus, claims arising from mandatory provisions of employment contract law may not be waived during the current employment relationship and up to one month after its termination. The Federal Supreme Court also considers internal labor disputes (with only a few exceptions) to be non-arbitrable. This negative stance is mainly aimed at better protecting the rights of employees in Switzerland. Arbitration clauses in employment contracts cannot be excluded a priori, but they can be challenged or limited in scope if the dispute is subject to civil social proceedings.
26 The situation is different in the case of disputes over social plans, where there is an obligation to arbitrate. If the parties cannot agree on a social plan in the case of a mass dismissal, an arbitration court must be appointed in accordance with Art. 335j CO, which establishes a social plan by means of a binding arbitration award. Although this arbitration tribunal does not belong to the classical arbitration jurisdiction, it is nevertheless a dispute resolution mechanism because a neutral third party is called in to resolve the dispute between the labor parties in a binding manner. This arbitration panel is exclusively active in shaping the contract and works out a binding contract or a concrete social plan in consultation with the social partners. However, it has no authority to issue an arbitration award on disputed legal claims with legal effect and direct enforceability.
27 Finally, the Federal Conciliation Board (EES) and the cantonal conciliation boards for disputes arising from collective and standard employment agreements must be mentioned. The EES is a conciliation body under public law consisting of a so-called umpire proposed by the Federal Council and two assessors proposed by the leading associations, representing the employee side and the employer side. If mediation fails, arbitration proceedings are initiated. However, the EES only conducts arbitration proceedings with the express mutual agreement of the social partners. This is because at the end it issues an arbitration award with binding effect, which is enforceable like a court judgment (Art. 5 EES in conjunction with Art. 387 CPC). The EES also acts preventively in order to mitigate or avert potential conflicts as far as possible. In conclusion, the EES can either aim at a consensual solution in its mediation role, or it can pronounce a binding judgment in its arbitration role - with the explicit concession of the parties to the dispute.
3. Arbitration in Construction Disputes
28 Arbitration is considered well established in the construction industry for real estate disputes. The SIA Standard 150:2018 was launched as a new arbitration regulation with efficiency-promoting specifications for proceedings before an arbitration tribunal. With solution-oriented facilitations, such as tighter time limits, the choice between voluntary and compulsory settlement negotiations, and simplified party submissions, it efficiently focuses on consensual dispute resolution.
29 Although this SIA standard is geared to arbitration proceedings in the Swiss construction industry, it also applies to international construction disputes and other disputes. In addition to the expert reports ordered by the court, the parties are now also allowed to obtain expert reports from specifically qualified experts, provided that their reports reflect their own assessment (Art. 24 para. 4 SIA 150:2018). Simplified proceedings also come into play if the amount in dispute is less than CHF 250,000 or if the parties so agree. In the simplified procedure, a sole arbitrator shall render a decision within six months after only one written exchange or oral hearing or, if so agreed by the parties, also on the basis of documentary evidence.
4. Arbitration in rental matters
30 As the Federal Supreme Court has ruled, claims arising from rental matters in connection with the rent of business premises or also with rent customary in the locality or quarter are arbitrable without restriction.
31 In contrast, disputes in matters arising from rent and lease of residential premises are in principle not arbitrable, unless the locally competent or state arbitration authority for rental disputes is appointed as an arbitral tribunal (Art. 361 para. 4 in conjunction with Art. 200 CPC). If an arbitration hearing takes place, a joint commission will try to reconcile the disputing parties in order to avoid going to court.
5. Arbitration in matters of succession
32 A pending division of an estate or future transfer of a legacy often involves a potential risk of conflict for the community of heirs. Consequently, the question arises whether inheritance actions can also be brought before arbitration courts. In particular, the action for the division of the estate (Art. 604 CC), the action for information (Art. 607 and 610 CC) and the interpretation of the will are considered arbitrable. Künzle also considers arbitrability to exist for actions for invalidity (Art. 519 ff. CC), actions for reduction and also for equalization (Art. 626 ff. CC).
33 Arbitration courts have jurisdiction over inheritance matters if a testator concluded an inheritance contract during his or her lifetime or if the heirs submit a contract after death. The division of an estate can take a long time and, especially in the case of estates from a family business, it is essential for the continued existence of the business to have the separation of the generations arranged at an early stage. The testator can make provisions in this regard during his or her lifetime and appoint an arbitrator in the inheritance contract, who would settle the dispute in the event of an action for the division of the estate.
B. Arbitration agreement
34 Arbitration agreements (Art. 358 CPC) are either arbitration contracts or arbitration clauses. Thus, by means of an arbitration clause, the parties agree in advance that they wish to refer any dispute to arbitration. If, on the other hand, they wish to submit a currently existing dispute to arbitration, this is stipulated in an arbitration agreement. It must be clearly stipulated which arbitration court is to have jurisdiction. The waiver of the state court must be explicitly formulated, otherwise it is considered voidable due to inadmissible self-restriction of personal freedom (Art. 27 para. 2 CC).
35 In the arbitration agreement or arbitration agreement, the parties contractually stipulate that in the event of a dispute they wish to have recourse to an arbitration court instead of a state court. There is no legal definition of an arbitration agreement in either the CPC or the PILA. The Federal Supreme Court has defined the arbitration agreement as an agreement "by which two or more specific or determinable parties agree to submit one or more, existing or future disputes to binding arbitration in accordance with a directly or indirectly determined legal order, to the exclusion of the original state jurisdiction". Whether arbitration agreements are to be assessed as a contract of procedural law or of substantive private law, or even as a hybrid form, is disputed in the doctrine.
36 If the dispute relates to the validity of a contract with an arbitration clause, this clause remains valid irrespective of whether the contract is voidable or voidable, and the arbitral tribunal may be seized in accordance with these requirements. In other words, if the arbitral tribunal finds the contract null and void, it does not automatically follow that the arbitration clause is invalid (Art. 23 para. 2 Swiss Rules 2021; Art. 23 para. 1 UAR).
C. Appointment of the Arbitral Tribunal
37 According to Art. 361 para. 1 CPC, full party autonomy prevails in the appointment of the arbitral tribunal, i.e. the parties may determine the appointment procedure themselves in their arbitration agreement. In their arbitration agreement, they may, for example, determine that they wish to appoint a specific sole arbitrator or several specific arbitrators. If there is no clear prior party election, each party shall appoint the same number of members (Art. 361 para. 2 CPC; Art. 11 para. 1 Swiss Rules 2021; Art. 9 para. 1 UAR). The elected arbitrators must then unanimously select another person to chair or preside (Art. 361 para. 2 CPC; Art. 9 para. 1 UAR). According to Art. 368 para. 1 CPC, no party may exercise a predominant influence on the appointment of the members. The arbitral tribunal is not operational until all members have been accepted. Should one or the other party fail to appoint its members to the arbitral tribunal in due time, a third party or the state court, as juge d'appui, shall be mandated to appoint them in its place (Art. 362 CPC).
D. Arbitration at a Glance
1. Procedural principles
38 Arbitral tribunals may render final or enforceable arbitral decisions in lieu of public or state courts, provided that they meet the requirements of the rule of law or ensure fair hearings at all times and under all circumstances. Thus, according to Art. 373 para. 4 CPC, arbitral tribunals must: "ensure the equal treatment of the parties and their right to be heard, and conduct adversarial proceedings." These procedural principles for arbitral proceedings are formulated congruently in Art. 373 para. 4 CPC as well as in Art. 182 para. 3 PILA and correspond to the general procedural guarantees under Art. 29 para. 1 and 2 FC, i.e. the explicitly stipulated claims "to equal and fair treatment" as well as "to a fair hearing", except for the right "to be judged within a reasonable time".
39 Arbitral tribunals must sufficiently guarantee the procedural principles and thus in principle guarantee an independent and impartial administration of justice (Art. 12 Swiss Rules 2021; Art. 11 UAR; Art. 11 ICC Rules of Arbitration). If these procedural guarantees or the principles of equal treatment of the parties or the right to be heard have been violated, this constitutes a complaint pursuant to Art. 393 lit. d CPC and can be objected to accordingly.
2. Jurisdiction
40 An arbitral tribunal is competent to decide on a legal dispute if the parties have stipulated this in an arbitration agreement and the matter is arbitrable. If the competence of the arbitral tribunal is disputed, according to Art. 359 para. 1 CPC it is entitled to decide on the matter in its own competence (so-called competence competence; see also Art. 23 para. 1 Swiss Rules 2021). On the other hand, it is the state court and not the arbitral tribunal that is responsible for ensuring that the arbitral tribunals are constituted in accordance with the law. For example, according to Art. 356 para. 2 lit. a CPC, it is the sole responsibility of the public court to decide on a request by the parties to challenge, dismiss or replace a challenged arbitrator.
3. Arbitration Rules in Particular
41 The parties to a dispute may determine in their arbitration agreement which form of procedure they wish to agree upon. Pursuant to Art. 373 para. 1 CPC, they are free to settle their dispute themselves in a tailor made procedure or, preferably, to determine arbitration rules of their choice - e.g. the Swiss Rules 2021, the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (UAR) or the ICC Rules of Arbitration. As a third option, a state procedural law may be designated (Art. 373 para. 1 lit. c CPC). If the parties to the dispute have failed to determine the form of procedure, then the arbitral tribunal is competent to order these rules of procedure (Procedural Rules).
42 If the parties to a dispute decide to call upon an arbitral institution, the arbitration rules of this institution are usually adopted at the same time. In the case of ad hoc arbitration, the arbitration rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) are chosen by the majority, but reference can also be made to the arbitration rules of an arbitral institution - such as the ICC Rules of Arbitration or the Swiss Rules 2021.
a. Swiss Rules 2021
43 In order for the Swiss Rules to apply in a national or international arbitration, the arbitration agreement between the parties must explicitly refer to them (Art. 1 para. 1 Swiss Rules 2021). After general procedural principles under Art. 1-7 Swiss Rules 2021, Art. 8-15 Swiss Rules 2021 specify the procedure for the composition of the arbitral tribunal. The arbitration procedure is governed by Art. 16-32 Swiss Rules 2021 and specifies, among other things, the procedure and time limits for the exchange of written submissions and the oral hearing.
b. ICC Rules of Arbitration
44 The Rules of Arbitration of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) aim to provide a neutral framework for the resolution of international disputes, covering a wide range of legal traditions, cultures and professions. The Rules of Arbitration govern the initiation of proceedings (Art. 4-6 ICC Rules of Arbtriation), appointment of the arbitral tribunal (Art. 11-15 ICC Rules of Arbtriation) and the dispute resolution process (Art. 16-30 ICC Rules of Arbtriation), while allowing the parties to adapt the procedure to their needs.
c. UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules
45 The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (UAR) provide a comprehensive set of procedural rules for ad hoc but also institutional arbitration tribunals. According to Art. 1 para. 1 UAR, full party autonomy applies, so that the specifications of the UAR can be freely amended by the parties to a large extent and adapted to their respective needs. The procedure itself is not particularly different from other regulations. However, the UAR has particularly efficient rules with regard to the appointment of the arbitral tribunal, which virtually makes any delay impossible. If the parties have not regulated the appointment separately, the so-called appointing authority takes over the appointment of the arbitration panel. This appointing authority can be chosen by the parties themselves (Art. 6 para. 1 UAR); if they cannot agree on the appointment, the so-called designating authority - in casu the Secretary General of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague - is designated.
4. Termination of the Arbitration
46 Upon termination of the arbitration proceedings, the arbitral tribunal shall render its award, which shall be communicated to the parties (Art. 381 et seq. CPC). All members of the arbitral tribunal shall participate in the deliberation and voting on the award. If one of the members refuses to participate, the others may nevertheless deliberate and decide, unless otherwise agreed (Art. 382 para. 1 and 2 CPC).
47 The arbitral award may first be issued orally and then be reasoned in writing, provided that the parties do not waive this (Art. 34 para. 2 and 3 Swiss Rules 2021; Art. 34 para. 2 and 3 UAR). No provision is made for an appeal. If the parties succeed in reaching an early agreement by acknowledging or withdrawing the claim or by ending the dispute with a settlement already in the course of the proceedings, the arbitral tribunal must, at the request of both parties, pronounce this in the form of an award which shall become final and enforceable (Art. 385 CPC).
5. Remedies
48 Due to their autonomy, the parties are also entitled to determine the arbitral appeal procedure themselves. In this context, "all possibilities of further appeal shall be considered which - according to the will of the parties - do not yet terminate the arbitral proceedings and therefore close the appeal to the state court (cf. Art. 391 CPC)".
a. Arbitration Appeal
49 The doctrine cannot conclusively classify the civil appeal as an ordinary or extraordinary remedy because the grounds of appeal against arbitral awards are limited (Art. 393 CPC). This is because state courts may not, in principle, interfere with private autonomous arbitral jurisdiction with a substantive review of correctness, but may only review the prerequisites of properly functioning arbitration. According to Art. 390 para. 1 CPC, the parties may, as an alternative to the Federal Supreme Court, appeal to the cantonal court (Art. 390 para. 2 in conjunction with Art. 356 CPC). The appeal is only admissible after exhaustion of the arbitral remedies provided for in the arbitration agreement (Art. 391 CPC), i.e. it has subsidiary effect.
b. Revision
50 According to Art. 396 para. 1 CPC, a revision of an arbitral award must be brought before a higher cantonal court. The grounds for revision correspond to those which, according to Art. 328 CPC, also apply to state court proceedings. The competence of the competent revision authority is limited to the annulment of the arbitral award and the remittal to the original arbitral tribunal for reassessment (Art. 399 CPC).
6. Legal force and enforcement
51 Arbitral awards acquire the effect of an immediately final and enforceable court decision upon their oral opening or upon their service (Art. 387 CPC). The enforcement of arbitral awards is implemented by the judicial authorities in the same way as that of a state judgment. Accordingly, they are also competent to certify the enforceability of the arbitral awards upon request. The arbitration proceedings are deemed to be settled insofar as the first-instance arbitral award has not been challenged and the so-called enforcement order thus has legal force.
Bibliography
Arroyo Manuel, in: Sutter-Somm Thomas/Hasenböhler Franz/Leuenberger Christoph (Hrsg.), Kommentar zur Schweizerischen Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 3. Aufl., Zürich 2016 (zit. Schulthess Kommentar).
Aubert Gabriel, L’arbitrage en droit du travail, in: Aubert Gabriel/Aubry Girardin Florence/Mahon Pascal/Kocherhans Nathalie (Hrsg.), Journée de droit du travail et de la sécurité sociale 1996, Zürich 1999, S. 107 ff.
Bachofner Eva, Die Mieterausweisung. Rechtsschutz in klaren und in weniger klaren Fällen, Diss. Basel 2018.
Baumgartner Samuel/Dolge Annette/Markus Alexander R./Spühler Karl, Schweizerisches Zivilprozessrecht mit Grundzügen des internationalen Zivilprozessrechts, 10. Aufl., Bern 2018.
Berger Bernhard, in: Hausheer Heinz/Walter Hans Peter (Hrsg.), Berner Kommentar ZPO, Bd II: Art. 150–353 ZPO und Art. Art. 400–406 ZPO, Bern 2012 (zit. BK).
Berger Bernhard/Güngerich Andreas/Hurni Christoph/Strittmatter Reto, Zivilprozessrecht, 2. Aufl., Bern 2021.
Berger Bernhard/Kellerhals Franz, International and Domestic Arbitration in Switzerland, 4. Aufl., Bern 2021.
Besson Sébastien/Lauber-Thommesen Nina, in: Zuberbühler Tobias/Müller Christoph/Habegger Philipp (Hrsg.), Swiss Rules of International Arbitration – Commentary, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2023 (zit. Swiss Rules Commentary).
Blake Susan/Browne Julie/Sime Stuart, A Practical Approach to Alternative Dispute Resolution, 4. Aufl., Oxford 2016.
Bohnet François, Procédure civile, 3. Aufl., Basel 2021.
Bohnet François/Constantina Catalina, L’arbitrabilité des conflits individuels de travail, in : Dunand Jean-Philippe/Mahon Pascal/Bohnet François (Hrsg.), Les procédures en droit du travail, Neuenburg/Basel 2020, S. 138 ff.
Bohnet François/Droese Lorenz, Präjudizienbuch ZPO Zivilprozessordnung, Bern 2018 (zit. Präjudizienbuch).
Boog Chrsitoph/Stark-Traber Sonja, in: Hausheer Heinz/Walter Hans Peter (Hrsg.), Berner Kommentar ZPO, Bd III: Art. 353–399 ZPO und Art. 407 ZPO, Bern 2014 (zit. BK).
Born Gary B., International Commercial Arbitration, 3. Aufl., Den Haag 2021.
Brooker Penny, The Juridification of Alternative Dispute Resolution, Anglo-American Law Review 28/1999, S. 1 ff.
Bucher Andreas, in: Bucher Andreas (Hrsg.), Loi sur le droit international privé (LDIP) – Convention de Lugano, Commentaire Romand, Basel 2011 (zit. CR).
Bühler Micha/Stacher Marco, Costs in International Arbitration, in: Arroyo Manuel (Hrsg.), Arbitration in Switzerland: The Practitioner’s Guide, Volume I, 2. Aufl. The Netherlands 2018, S. 2567 ff.
Burkhalter Peter/Grell Boris T., Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit der Schweizer Immobilienwirtschaft, Zürich 2005.
Buschmann Barbara, Tipps für den Umgang mit Baustreitigkeiten. Konfliktprävention und alternative Streitbeilegung, Berlin/Wien/Zürich 2015.
Carneiro Davide/Novais Paulo/Andrade Francisco/Zeleznikow John/Neves José, Online Dispute Resolution: an Artificial Intelligence Perspective, in: Artificial Intelligence Review 41 (2014), S. 211 ff.
Caron David D./Caplan Lee M., The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules: A Commentary, 2. Aufl., Oxford 2013
Casey Angela, Fehlende Schiedsfähigkeit zwingender arbeitsrechtlicher Ansprüche im Binnenverhältnis – Anmerkungen zu BGE 4A_7/2018 vom 18.4.2018, in: ASA Bulletin 36 (2018), S. 399 ff. (zit. fehlende Schiedsfähigkeit)
dieselbe, Individualarbeitsrechtliche Streitigkeiten im Schiedsverfahren, in: ASA Bulletin 35 (2017), S 266 ff. (zit. individualarbeitsrechtliche Streitigkeiten)
Chrobak Lennart: Der Anwendungsbereich des Schiedsverfahrens in Erbsachen. Eine Untersuchung der objektiven Schiedsfähigkeit gemäss ZPO und IPRG unter Einbezug des Stiftungs-, Trust- und Familienrechts, Diss. Zürich.
Courvoisier Maurice/Wenger Werner, in: Sutter-Somm Thomas/Hasenböhler Franz/Leuenberger Christoph (Hrsg.), Kommentar zur Schweizerischen Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 3. Aufl., Zürich 2016 (zit. Schulthess Kommentar).
Croft Clyde/Kee Christopher/Waincymer Jeff, A Guide to the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, Cambridge 2013.
Dasser Felix, in: Oberhammer Paul/Domej Tanja/Haas Ulrich (Hrsg.), Kurzkommentar zur Schweizerischen Zivilprozessordnung, 3. Aufl., Basel 2021 (zit. KuKo).
Dolge Annette, in: Spühler Karl/Tenchio Luca/Infanger Dominik (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 3. Aufl., Basel 2017 (zit. BSK).
Ehle Bernd, SIA 150:2018 – Modern Swiss arbitration rules for construction disputes, in: ASA Bulletin 36 (2018), S. 896 ff.
Emerson Frank D., History of Arbitration Practice and Law, in: Cleveland State Law Review 19/1970, S. 155 ff.
Engel Martin, Collaborative Law. Mediation ohne Mediator, Tübingen 2010.
Fischer Jonas/Schneuwly Anne Mirjam, Alternative Dispute Resolution: Verhandlung, Mediation, Schlichtung, Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Schiedsgutachten, Hybride ADR-Verfahren, Zürich/St. Gallen 2021.
Furrer Andreas/Girsberger Daniel/Ambauen Irma, in: Amstutz Marc et al. (Hrsg.), Handkommentar zum Schweizer Privatrecht, 3. Aufl. Zürich 2016 (zit. CHK).
Gabriel Simon/Girsberger Daniel, Die Rechtsnatur der Schiedsvereinbarung im schweizerischen Recht, in: Gauch Peter et al. (Hrsg.), Festschrift P. Tercier, Zürich 2008, S. 819 ff.
Gautier Pierre-Yves, Pour convaincre l’arbitre, in: ASA Bulletin 32 (2014), S. 508 ff.
Girsberger Daniel, in: Spühler Karl/Tenchio Luca/Infanger Dominik, in: Spühler Karl/Tenchio Luca/Infanger Dominik (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 3. Aufl., Basel 2017 (zit. BSK).
Girsberger Daniel/Habegger Philipp/Mràz Michael/Peter Flavio/Weber-Stecher Urs, in: Spühler Karl/Tenchio Luca/Infanger Dominik, in: Spühler Karl/Tenchio Luca/Infanger Dominik (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 3. Aufl., Basel 2017 (zit. BSK).
Girsberger Daniel/Peter James T., Aussergerichtliche Konfliktlösung. Kommunikation – Konfliktmanagement – Verhandlung – Mediation – Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Zürich/Basel/Genf 2019.
Girsberger Daniel/Voser Nathalie, International Arbitration, Comparative and Swiss Perspectives, 4. Aufl., Zürich 2021.
Giudici Camilla, Der Sozialplan in einer vergleichenden europäischen Perspektive. Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Schweiz, Deutschlands und Italiens, Diss. Bern 2019.
Göksu Tarkan, in: Chabloz Isabelle/Dietschy-Martenet Patricia/Heinzmann Michel, Petit commentaire CPC (Code de procédure civile), Basel 2020 (zit. PC).
derselbe, Die neue SIA-Schiedsordnung (SIA 150:2018), BR 2018, S. 5 ff. (zit. BR).
derselbe, Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Zürich/St. Gallen 2014 (zit. Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit).
derselbe, Schiedsgerichtlicher Instanzenzug – Welches Verfahren bei Rechtsmitteln an ein Obergericht?, ASA Bulletin 34 (2016), S. 606 ff. (zit. ASA Bulletin).
Gränicher Dieter, in: Sutter-Somm Thomas/Hasenböhler Franz/Leuenberger Christoph (Hrsg.), Kommentar zur Schweizerischen Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 3. Aufl., Zürich 2016 (zit. Schulthess Kommentar).
derselbe, in: Grolimund Pascal/Loacker Leander/Schnyder Anton (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Internationales Privatrecht (IPRG), 4. Aufl., Basel 2021 (zit. BSK).
Haas Ulrich/Brosi Jeffrey, Einseitige, insbesondere testamentarische Schiedsklauseln nach der (geplanten) Reform zur Internationalen Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, in: ZZPInt 21 (2016), S. 323 ff.
Habegger Philipp, in: Spühler Karl/Tenchio Luca/Infanger Dominik, in: Spühler Karl/Tenchio Luca/Infanger Dominik (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 3. Aufl., Basel 2017 (zit. BSK).
Heinzmann Michel/Maradan Léonard, Procès civil social et arbitrabilité des litiges en droit du travail, in: Universitäre Fernstudien Schweiz (Hrsg.), Quid iuris?, Festschrift Universitäre Fernstudien Schweiz 10 Jahre Bachelor of Law, Bern 2015, S. 97 ff.
Huber, Lucius, Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit in der Schweiz – Perspektiven und Herausforderungen, in: ZSR NF 121 II, 2002, S. 77 ff.
Hochstrasser Daniel/Brulet Simone, in: Grolimund Pascal/Loacker Leander/Schnyder Anton (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Internationales Privatrecht (IPRG), 4. Aufl., Basel 2021 (zit. BSK).
Hofbauer Simone, History of Arbitration in Switzerland, in: Arroyo Manuel (Hrsg.), Arbitration in Switzerland: The Practitioner’s Guide, Volume I, 2. Aufl. The Netherlands 2018, S. 3 ff.
Horn Jakob, Der Emergency Arbitrator und die ZPO, Tübingen 2019.
Jermini Cesare/Bernardoni Nicola, Domestic Arbitration under the Swiss Code of Civil Procedure, in: Arroyo Manuel (Hrsg.), Arbitration in Switzerland: The Practitioner’s Guide, Volume I, 2. Aufl., The Netherlands 2018, S. 21 ff.
Jermini Cesare/Castiglioni Luca, in: Zuberbühler Tobias/Müller Christoph/Habegger Philipp (Hrsg.), Swiss Rules of International Arbitration – Commentary, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2023 (zit. Swiss Rules Commentary).
Johnson Alexandra C., Arbitration Labor Disputes, in: Arroyo Manuel (Hrsg.), Arbitration in Switzerland: The Practitioner’s Guide, Volume I, 2. Aufl. The Netherlands 2018, S. 1191 ff.
Jones Grant/Pexton Peter, ADR and Trusts: An international guide to arbitration and mediation of trust disputes, London 2015.
Kellor, Frances A., American Arbitration: Its History, Functions and Achievements, Washington D.C. 1948.
Kramer Michael, in: Brunner Alexander/Gasser Dominik/Schwander Ivo (Hrsg.), ZPO Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung, 2. Aufl., Zürich 2016 (zit. Dike Kommentar).
Kramer Michael/Wiget Matthias, in: Brunner Alexander/Gasser Dominik/Schwander Ivo (Hrsg.), ZPO Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung, 2. Aufl., Zürich 2016 (zit. Dike Kommentar).
Künzle, Hans Rainer, Schiedsfähigkeit von und Schiedsverfahren in Erbsachen, Einleitung, in: successio 2020, S. 70 ff. (zit. Schiedsfähigkeit)
derselbe, Unternehmen im Nachlass − insbesondere Vollstreckung an Gesellschaftsanteilen – Länderbericht Schweiz, in: Künzle Hans Rainer (Hrsg.), 2. Schweizerisch-deutscher Testamentsvollstreckertag. Referate des Weiterbildungsseminars des Vereins Successio und der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Testamentsvollstreckung und Vermögenssorge e.V. an der Universität Luzern vom 21.4.2017, Zürich 2018, S. 47 ff. (zit. Unternehmen im Nachlass).
Lazpoulos Michael, in: Hausheer Heinz/Walter Hans Peter (Hrsg.), Berner Kommentar ZPO, Bd III: Art. 353–399 ZPO und Art. 407 ZPO, Bern 2014 (zit. BK).
Mabillard Ramon/Briner Adrian, in: Grolimund Pascal/Loacker Leander/Schnyder Anton (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Internationales Privatrecht (IPRG), 4. Aufl., Basel 2021 (zit. BSK).
Marugg Daniel /Jung-Utzinger Julia, in: Hausheer Heinz/Walter Hans Peter (Hrsg.), Berner Kommentar ZPO, Bd III: Art. 353–399 ZPO und Art. 407 ZPO, Bern 2014 (zit. BK).
Marugg Daniel/Keller Jupitz Carolina, in: Hausheer Heinz/Walter Hans Peter (Hrsg.), Berner Kommentar ZPO, Bd III: Art. 353–399 ZPO und Art. 407 ZPO, Bern 2014 (zit. BK).
Marugg Daniel/Neukom Chaney Anna, in: Hausheer Heinz/Walter Hans Peter (Hrsg.), Berner Kommentar ZPO, Bd III: Art. 353–399 ZPO und Art. 407 ZPO, Bern 2014 (zit. BK).
Mràz Michael/Peter Flavio, in: Spühler Karl/Tenchio Luca/Infanger Dominik, in: Spühler Karl/Tenchio Luca/Infanger Dominik (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 3. Aufl., Basel 2017 (zit. BSK).
Molina Martin/Pfisterer Stefanie, in: Zuberbühler Tobias/Müller Christoph/Habegger Philipp (Hrsg.), Swiss Rules of International Arbitration – Commentary, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2023 (zit. Swiss Rules Commentary).
Müller Christoph, in: Sutter-Somm Thomas/Hasenböhler Franz/Leuenberger Christoph (Hrsg.), Kommentar zur Schweizerischen Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO), 3. Aufl., Zürich 2016 (zit. Schulthess Kommentar).
Neidhart Elena, La nature bicéphale de l’expertise-arbitrage, in: Hirsch Laurent/Imhoos Christophe (Hrsg.), Arbitrage, médiation et autres modes pour résoudre les conflits autrement, Zürich 2018, S. 299 ff.
Niedermaier Tilman, Schieds- und Schiedsverfahrensvereinbarungen in strukturellen Ungleichgewichtslagen. Ein deutsch-U.S.-amerikanischer Rechtsvergleich mit Schlaglichtern auf weitere Rechtsordnungen, Tübingen 2013.
Oeticker Christian, in: Müller-Chen Markus/Widmer Lüchinger Corinne (Hrsg.), Zürcher Kommentar zum IPRG, Band II, Art. 108a–200, Kommentar zum Bundesgesetz über das Internationale Privatrecht (IPRG) vom 18.12.1987, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2018 (zit. ZK).
derselbe, Ad Hoc Arbitration in Switzerland, in: Arroyo Manuel (Hrsg.), Arbitration in Switzerland: The Practitioner’s Guide, Volume I, 2. Aufl. The Netherlands 2018, S. 893 ff.
Patocchi Paolo Michele/Niedermaier Tilman, UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (UncitralO), in: Rolf A. Schütze (Hrsg.), Institutionelle Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Kommentar, 3. Aufl., Köln 2018, S. 963 ff.
Paulsson Jan/Petrochilos Georgios, UNCITRAL Arbitration, The Netherlands 2018.
Patocchi Paolo Michele/Niedermeier Tilmann, UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (UncitralO), in: Rolf A. Schütze (Hrsg.), Institutionelle Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Kommentar, 3. Aufl. Köln, S. 963 ff.
Pfändler Andrea Maria, Mediation beim Finanzintermediär – eine Alternative zum Gerichtsprozess? Management der Reputationsrisiken von Banken durch aussergerichtliche Verfahren der Streitschlichtung, Hamburg 2015.
Pfiffner Daniel C./Hochstrasser Daniel, in: Grolimund Pascal/Loacker Leander/Schnyder Anton (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Internationales Privatrecht (IPRG), 4. Aufl., Basel 2021 (zit. BSK).
Pfisterer Stefanie, in: Hausheer Heinz/Walter Hans Peter (Hrsg.), Berner Kommentar ZPO, Bd III: Art. 353–399 ZPO und Art. 407 ZPO, Bern 2014 (zit. BK).
Picht Peter Georg/Chrobak Lennart, Einseitige Schiedsklauseln in der Schweizer Schiedsrechtsrevision – Teil I, in: SJZ 114 (2018), S. 205 ff.
Planinic Tanja/Erk Nadja, Orell Füssli Kommentar, ZPO Kommentar, Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung, 2. Aufl., Zürich 2015 (zit. OFK).
Raeschke-Kessler Hilmar, Die Unparteilichkeit und Unabhängigkeit des Schiedsrichter – ein transnationales Rechtsproblem?, ASA Bulletin 28 (2008), S. 3 ff.
Reiner Andreas/Petkutei Jurgita/Kern Carsten, ICC-Schiedsordnung, in: Rolf A. Schütze (Hrsg.), Institutionelle Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit, Kommentar, 3. Aufl. Köln, S. 21 ff.
Rigozzi Antonio/Kaufmann-Kohler Gabrielle, International Arbitration, Law and Practice in Switzerland, 3. Aufl., Oxford 2015.
Roebuck Derek, The Myth of Modern Mediation, in: Arbitration (1) 73 (2007), S. 105 ff.
Rohner Thomas, in: Zuberbühler Tobias/Müller Christoph/Habegger Philipp (Hrsg.), Swiss Rules of International Arbitration – Commentary, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2023 (zit. Swiss Rules Commentary).
Rohrer Beat, Art. 269a OR, in: SVIT Schweiz (Hrsg.), Das Schweizerische Mietrecht, Kommentar, 4. Aufl., Zürich 2018.
Schüttel Nadine, Streitbeilegung im Internet – Zukunft oder Irrweg?, Diss. Freiburg i.Br. 2014.
Schwander Ivo/Stacher Marco, in: Brunner Alexander/Gasser Dominik/Schwander Ivo (Hrsg.), ZPO Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung, 2. Aufl., Zürich 2016 (zit. Dike Kommentar).
Schweizer Philippe, in: Bohnet François/Haldy Jacques/Jeandin Nicolas/Tappy Denis (Hrsg.), Code de procédure civile, Commentaire Romand, 2. Aufl., Basel 2019 (zit. CR).
Smahi Nadia, The Arbitrator’s Liability and Immunity Under Swiss Law – Part I, in: ASA Bulletin 34 (2016), S. 876 ff.
Spoorenberger Frank/Franchini Daniela, in: Zuberbühler Tobias/Müller Christoph/Habegger Philipp (Hrsg.), Swiss Rules of International Arbitration – Commentary, 3. Aufl., Zürich 2023 (zit. Swiss Rules Commentary).
Stacher Marco, in: Hausheer Heinz/Walter Hans Peter (Hrsg.), Berner Kommentar ZPO, Bd III: Art. 353–399 ZPO und Art. 407 ZPO, Bern 2014 (zit. BK).
derselbe, in: Brunner Alexander/Gasser Dominik/Schwander Ivo (Hrsg.), ZPO Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung, 2. Aufl., Zürich 2016 (zit. Dike Kommentar).
derselbe, Einführung in die internationale Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit der Schweiz, 2. Aufl., Zürich 2021.
Staehelin Adrian/Staehelin Daniel /Grolimund Pascal, Zivilprozessrecht (PrintPlu§), 3. Aufl., Zürich 2019.
Street Laurence, The language of ADR – its utility in resolving international commercial disputes in the role of the mediator, in: Arbitration 58 (1992), Supp (Annual conference Hong Kong), S. 17 ff.
Stürner Michael/Wilhelmi Rüdiger, Post-M&A-Schiedsverfahren. Recht und Rechtsfindung jenseits des gesetzlichen Rechts, Wiesbaden 2019.
Sutter-Somm Thomas/Gut Nicolas, Schiedsgerichte in Erbsachen. Die Sicht des Zivilprozessrechts, insbesondere die Frage der Zulässigkeit einseitiger (testamentarischer) Schiedsklauseln, in: Künzle Hans Rainer (Hrsg.), Schiedsgerichte in Erbsachen, Zürich 2012, S. 138 ff.
Sutter-Somm Thomas/Seiler Benedikt, in: Sutter-Somm Thomas/Seiler Benedikt (Hrsg.), Handkommentar zum Schweizer Privatrecht, 2021 Zürich (zit. CHK).
Vischer Frank/Müller Roland, Der Arbeitsvertrag, 4. Aufl. Basel 2014.
Walser Manuel, Schiedsfähigkeit, Zürich 2018.
Webster Thomas H./Bühler Michael W., Handbook of ICC Arbitration, 5. Aufl., London 2021.
Wenger Werner/Aufrichtig Janina, Ist das gemäss Art. 335j OR zu bestellende «Schiedsgericht» ein Schiedsgericht?, in: Fankhauser Roland/Widmer Lüchinger Corinne/Klingler Rafael/Seiler Benedikt (Hrsg.), Das Zivilrecht und seine Durchsetzung, Festschrift für Professor Thomas Sutter-Somm, Zürich 2016, S. 719 ff.
Widdascheck Mirko, Die UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules als semi-institutionelle Schiedsverfahrensregeln, Frankfurt a.M. 2016.
Wildhaber Isabelle S./Johnson Wilcke Alexandra, Die Schiedsfähigkeit von individualarbeitsrechtlichen Streitigkeiten in der Binnenschiedsgerichtsbarkeit, in: Zeitschrift für Arbeitsrecht und Arbeitslosenversicherung (ARV) 2010, S. 160 ff.
Wimalasena Philip, The Publication of Arbitral Awards as a Contribution to Legal Development – A Plea for more Transparency in International Commercial Arbitration, in: ASA Bulletin 37 (2019), S. 279 ff.
Wolaver Earl S., The Historical Background of Commercial Arbitration, in: University of Pennsylvania Law Review and American Law Register 83/1934, S. 132 ff.
Zufferey Jean-Baptiste/Perritaz Pierre/Schumacher Valentin, Das Schiedsgutachten: Erläuterungen, Mustervertrag, Zürich 2013.
Materials
Botschaft zur Schweizerischen Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO) vom 28.6.2006, BBl 7221 ff. (zit. Botschaft ZPO).