Facts
In 1988, a limited liability company was granted a loan of 13,500,000 DM by a Geneva-based financial institution for the construction of a luxury hotel on the territory of the municipality of Macot La Plagne (France). The repayment of this loan was to be guaranteed by the said municipality.
On March 11, 1988, the municipal council accepted to provide this guarantee and authorized the mayor to conclude an agreement to this end. On the same day, the borrower and the municipality, represented by its mayor, signed three identical loan agreements with the Geneva-based financial institution, each containing a jurisdiction clause in favor of the Geneva courts.
Subsequently, the borrower was no longer able to pay the interest on the loans. The three Luxembourg banks to which the claims had been assigned then sued the municipality before the Court of First Instance of the Canton of Geneva, based on the jurisdiction clause.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal examines ex officio and freely the admissibility of the appeals submitted to it. The public law appeal for violation of Art. 4 Cst. is admissible, as decisions relating to jurisdiction ratione loci or ratione materiae are not subject to the requirement of irreparable damage.
However, the public law appeal has a subsidiary character in relation to other legal remedies. All the grievances articulated in the public law appeal are also, in addition to other means, in the appeal for reform filed in parallel by the appellant. The Federal Tribunal must therefore examine whether these grievances fall within the procedure of…