Facts
In the mid-2000s, the Italian company X. S.p.A. and the Dutch company Y. B.V., a subsidiary of the Y. Group, concluded a contract for the construction and installation of a boat lift in Italy. During the final test, cables broke, causing the platform to fall. A dispute arose between the two companies regarding the responsibility for this accident.
In 2011, [Y.] filed a request for arbitration against X. with the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Court of Arbitration. On April 26, 2012, the ICC appointed a Zurich lawyer, Mr. (...), as the sole arbitrator. After hearing the case, the arbitrator rendered his final award on April 23, 2015, rejecting any liability of [Y.] and ordering X. to pay him 2,272,500 euros.
On August 4, 2015, X. filed a request for revision of this award, alleging that the arbitrator, Mr. (...), a member of the law firm A.-CH, had a connection with a company of the Y. Group that should have led to his disqualification.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal first examined the admissibility of the request for revision. It noted that the discovery, after the expiry of the appeal period, of a ground for the arbitrator's disqualification raises a controversial issue in legal doctrine, the Federal Tribunal having so far left this question open. However, the Tribunal considered that it was not necessary to definitively settle this question, as the request for revision had to be rejected on the merits in any case.
On the merits, the Federal Tribunal considered that the arbitrator's law firm, A.-CH, should be regarded as a legally and financially autonomous entity, and not as a mere member of an integrated…