Switzerland / 29 April 1996 / Switzerland, Tribunal Fédéral (Federal Tribunal) / Fondation M v. Banque X
| Country | Switzerland |
| Court | Switzerland, Tribunal fédéral (Federal Tribunal) |
| Date | 29 April 1996 |
| Parties | Fondation M v. Banque X |
| Applicable NYC Provisions | II | II(3) |
| Source |
http://www.bger.ch (website of Swiss Federal Tribunal) |
| Languages | English |
| Summary | A contract was concluded between a Foundation and a Bank on 25 January 1990. The contract contained an arbitration agreement providing for the settlement of disputes by a sole arbitrator seated in Geneva. A dispute arose and the Foundation sued the Bank before the Swiss courts. The Bank objected to the jurisdiction of the Swiss courts based on the existence of an arbitration agreement. Both the Tribunal de première instance (Court of First Instance) and the Cour de Justice of Geneva (Geneva Court of Justice) accepted this argument and found that they lacked jurisdiction. The Tribunal Fédéral (Federal Tribunal) confirmed and held that a state court shall refuse jurisdiction where an arbitration agreement exists between the parties, unless it finds that the arbitration agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed. The Tribunal Fédéral found that the NYC did not apply in the present case as the arbitration agreement provided for the arbitration to be seated in Switzerland. The Tribunal Fédéral applied Article 7(b) of the Swiss Private International Law and held that when a court is asked to refer a dispute to arbitration, it shall carry out only a prima facie analysis of the validity of an arbitration agreement. It added that Article II(3) NYC adopted the same approach. In the present case, the Tribunal Fédéral held that the arbitration agreement was prima facie valid and the parties were to be referred to arbitration. |
| see also : |
Attachment (2)
 Original Language Adobe Acrobat PDF |
Unofficial Translation Adobe Acrobat PDF |
