Appointment of an Arbitrator in an International Arbitration Procedure

Facts

Following a sales contract concluded on June 11, 1984, a dispute arose between the establishments A., B., C. and D., headquartered in Vaduz, and X. and the establishments Y. and Z., also in Vaduz. The establishments A., B., C. and D. having requested the President of the Court of Justice of the Canton of Geneva to appoint an arbitrator, the latter designated a Geneva lawyer as arbitrator by decision of March 13, 1989.

X. filed a public law appeal against this decision, concluding for its annulment and invoking the violation of Articles 4 and 58 of the Federal Constitution.

Considerations

The Federal Tribunal considered that the public law appeal for violation of Article 58 of the Federal Constitution was inadmissible, as Article 113(3) of the Constitution prohibits the review of the constitutionality of federal laws and decrees, and Article 179(3) of the Federal Act on Private International Law (PILA) is a rule of federal law.

Furthermore, the Federal Tribunal held that no other appeal was available against the decision to appoint an arbitrator made pursuant to Article 179 PILA. Indeed, the appeal for reform was not admissible as the challenged decision was not a final cantonal instance decision, and the appeal for nullity was also not open as Article 179(3) PILA does not regulate the jurisdiction of the authorities based on the subject matter or location.

F…