Judgment of 9 February 1998

I SA, a Swiss company (plaintiff), and V, the chief executive officer of another company (defendant), entered a contract for technical management of ships. The contract created a joint venture in Singapore, G. Pte Ltd and contained an arbitration clause. Disputes arose under the contract and V initiated arbitration. An arbitration tribunal formed in Switzerland with I SA appointing an arbitrator, and V appointed another arbitrator. A final, third arbitrator also joined the arbitral tribunal as the president of the arbitral tribunal. In December 1995, the arbitral tribunal issued a partial award upholding its jurisdiction over the claims made by I SA. In September 1996, I SA requested that its arbitrator resign from the tribunal. I SA noted that the arbitrator and another lawyer were partners in the same law firm and that the partner of its arbitrator aggressively litigated against I SA in another case. The chief executive of I SA claimed he was “scandalized” by the partner’s aggressive litigation style. I SA sought to annul the award under Article 190 of the Swiss Law on Private International Law (SLPIL) in the Swiss courts, citing an uneasiness with the connection between its arbitrator and the partner. The court of first instance rejected I SA’s application for annulment of the award, finding that the “uneasiness” of I SA was not sufficient to justify a claim that the arbitrator lacked independence. I SA appealed to the Swiss Federal Tribunal to annul the arbitration award under Article 190 of the SLPIL.