Facts
In a pending dispute before the Labor Court of the Canton of Geneva, the defendant X. Sàrl requested the recusal of Judge [A.] due to business relations between this judge's spouse and the plaintiff's counsel. The President of Group I of the Labor Court and, on appeal by the defendant, the Labor Chamber of the Court of Justice, rejected this request.
The defendant filed a second request for the recusal of Judge A. The President of Group I declared this request inadmissible as it was late and repetitive. As a consequence of a procedure deemed reckless and dilatory, the President imposed a disciplinary fine of 1,000 francs on the defendant.
The Labor Chamber of the Court of Justice ruled on the defendant's appeal and declared it inadmissible on the grounds that the 10-day appeal period provided for in Art. 321 para. 2 CPC had not been respected.
The defendant appealed to the Federal Tribunal to have the judgment of the Court of Justice annulled, obtain the recusal of Judge [A.] and the referral of the case back to the Court for a new decision.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal first examined the applicable appeal period for the decision on the request for recusal. According to the majority of the doctrine, this decision is an "other decision" within the meaning of Art. 319 let. b CPC, and not an interlocutory order. The appeal is therefore subject to the ordinary 30-day period of Art. 321 para. 1 CPC, unless the procedure is summary, in which case the period is reduced to 10 days under Art. 321 para. 2 CPC.
The Federal Tribunal considered that the summary procedure was applicable to the request for recusal, as it must be resolved…