30-day time limit to challenge ICC award commences with notification of signed original award (Swiss Supreme Court)

In decision 4A_40/2018, the Swiss Supreme Court rejected a challenge to an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) award for an alleged violation of the right to be heard. It further confirmed that the 30-day time limit under Swiss law to challenge an award commences with the notification of the signed original arbitral award and not with the advance courtesy electronic copy sent by the ICC.

The Swiss Supreme Court has rejected a challenge to an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) award for an alleged violation of the right to be heard. In doing so, it confirmed that the 30-day time limit under Article 100 of the Swiss Supreme Court Act to challenge an award commences with the notification of the signed original arbitral award and not with the advance courtesy electronic copy sent by the ICC. The court reiterated its case law concerning the notification of awards by facsimile and applied the same reasoning to (advance) copies of awards by email.

Regarding the alleged violation of the right to be heard, the petitioner criticised the fact that the sole arbitrator had based its award in part on a voluminous annex to a witness statement, which was filed in electronic form only. Moreover, it was filed one day after the deadline for filing the submission. The Supreme Court found that the petitioner had failed to attempt to rectify this alleged procedural mistake during the arbitration. Further, the petitioner had not objected to the respondent's letter, wherein it clearly stated that the relevant annex was being sent in electronic form only. The applicant also failed to object at any relevant point in time thereafter. For these reasons, the challenge was rejected.

In addition to confirming the Supreme Court's strict approach to procedural objections being raised timely during proceedings, the decision also clarifies that for ICC arbitrations in Switzerland, the time period for challenging awards commences with the notification of the original award and not with the courtesy electronic copy.

Case: Decision 4A_40/2018 (26 September 2018).