Facts
The [X.] (complainant) is a company under Russian law with its seat in Russia and is the world's second-largest aluminum producer. The [Y. AG] (defendant) is a company under Swiss law and is primarily active in the trade of aluminum. The parties concluded four contracts in the year 2000, including a processing contract and an export contract. However, [X.] did not deliver the agreed quantity of aluminum and stopped deliveries in April 2000.
The [Y. AG] initiated arbitration proceedings, which were conducted by the Zurich Chamber of Commerce. The arbitral tribunal ordered [X.] to pay USD 90'461'257.43 plus interest to [Y. AG] . [X.] requested the annulment of the arbitral award and alleged a violation of the principle of equal treatment of the parties, a violation of the right to be heard, and a violation of public policy.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the admissibility of the complaint and came to the conclusion that the complaint is admissible, as the complainant has its seat outside Switzerland and the parties have not excluded the provisions of Chapter 12 of the PILA in writing.
The court dismissed the request for a second exchange of briefs, as the complainant had already made the request in the complaint without grounds and the defendant's response did not contain new arguments.
The court examined the allegation of a violation of public policy and came to the conclusion that the complainant did not allege that the challenged arbitral award violates fundamental principles. The complainant also alleged a violation of the principle of mitigation of damages, but it is not recognizable why a damaged person should be obliged to mitigate their damage according to the generally…