Anstalt F. (Liechtenstein) v. Company T (Panama)
Swiss Federal Supreme Court
BGE 118 IA 20 (1992)
- Written by Sara Adams, JD
Facts
Anstalt F. (Anstalt) (plaintiff), a Liechtenstein company, and T. Company Ltd. (Company T) (defendant), a Panamanian company, entered an agreement to form a joint company in Liechtenstein. The agreement included an arbitration clause, which stated that each party would appoint an arbitrator and the two appointed arbitrators would then select a third. The arbitration clause also provided that if any of the parties or the appointed arbitrators were unable or unwilling to choose an arbitrator pursuant to the agreement, either party could request that the president of the Commercial Court of Zurich make an appointment. After a dispute arose, Anstalt and Company T each appointed an arbitrator, but the two appointed arbitrators were unable to agree on a third. The president of the Commercial Court of Zurich was requested to appoint the third arbitrator but declined to do so, finding that the dispute between Anstalt and Company T did not fall under the scope of the arbitration clause. Anstalt appealed to the court of appeals, and after the appeal was denied, Anstalt appealed again to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
