Search for:

In 2017, the Swiss Government released a draft bill aiming at a reform of the Swiss international arbitration legislation. In March 2020, the reform has been debated in the Swiss Parliament and a revised draft bill has been approved (available in German, French and Italian). The draft bill is, however, not yet final and may still be subject to amendments.

  1. Planned amendments of the Swiss international arbitration legislation

Upon initiative of the Government, the Parliament is currently debating a reform of the Swiss international arbitration law (Chapter 12 of the Private International Law Act PILA). The principal features of the draft bill concern:

  • Clarification that Chapter 12 PILA applies if – at the time of conclusion of the arbitration agreement – at least one of the parties had its domicile, habitual residence, seat, or place of business outside Switzerland. Any change of those geographic elements after the conclusion of the arbitration agreement becomes irrelevant. In addition, for the application of Chapter 12 PILA the arbitral tribunal must have its seat in Switzerland;
  • Simplification of the form requirements for an arbitration agreement. An arbitration agreement is formally valid when one party meets the formal requirements, even if the other party does not (e.g., one party accepts the arbitration agreement orally). Moreover, arbitration agreements can be concluded by unilateral acts (e.g., last wills, tender offers, constitution deeds for foundations and trusts);
  • Express regulation of the arbitral tribunal’s appointment in multi-party arbitrations if the parties did not agree on specific rules (e.g., by reference to institutional arbitration rules);
  • Obligation of the parties to immediately object to any apparent violation of the procedural rules under penalty of forfeiting the right to do so in the further course of the proceedings, in accordance with the Federal Supreme Courts case law;
  • List of all available remedies against international arbitral awards rendered in Switzerland that have been accepted by the Federal Supreme Court and not yet expressly provided in Chapter 12 PILA (e.g., revision and correction);
  1. Major contentious issues: Corruption and submissions in English language

The past debate in the Swiss Parliament was, among others, characterized by two major questions, being (i) whether arbitrators should be vested with additional powers to autonomously investigate in corruption issues and (ii) whether submissions in English language should be allowed in set aside proceedings before the Federal Supreme Court.

The National Council, one of two Chambers of the Swiss Parliament, rejected already in December 2019 a parliamentarian’s proposal that arbitral tribunals may demand on their own initiative additional evidence in cases of suspected corruption. According to a spokesman of the National Council’s majority, it should not be the task of an arbitral tribunal to enforce higher-ranking state law. In March 2020, a minority of the Council of States, the second Chamber of the Swiss Parliament, proposed again to empower arbitral tribunals with tools to investigate suspected corruption. In support of the motion, a spokesman of the minority stated that that civil judges have a duty to report criminal acts of which they have knowledge while arbitrators do not and this different treatment would create a legal loophole. However, the proposal was ultimately rejected with a clear majority of 31 to 13 votes.

Furthermore, the draft bill initially presented by the Government in 2018 provided for the possibility to file submissions in English language in set aside proceedings before the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. While the National Council approved the proposal, the Council of States voted against it. Although the National Council still has a vote on this issue, it is questionable whether the parliamentarians will do so, particularly in the light of the strong objection by the Swiss bar associations and the Federal Supreme Court.

  1. What comes next?

Since Switzerland has a bicameral legislature, both Chambers of the Parliament – the National Council an the Council of States – need to approve the same wording of the draft bill to finally introduce the revision of international arbitration law. The current draft bill will likely be re-debated in the National Chamber’s summer session in June 2020. Once approved, the draft will be subject to a facultative referendum.

  1. History of the Chapter 12 PILA reform

The current Swiss international arbitration law (Chapter 12 PILA) came into force in 1989 and has since not been subject to major legislative review. Following up on a parliamentarian initiative, the Swiss Government proposed in January 2017 a “revision light” of Chapter 12 PILA aiming at modernizing the international arbitration law. According to the relevant explanatory note, the draft bill contains updates in line with the settled case law of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, eliminations of ambiguities, improvements of legal certainty and legal clarity and the alignment of Chapter 12 PILA with recent developments in international arbitration. Overall, the Swiss Government followed a “so much as necessary and as little as possible” approach to preserve as far as possible party autonomy – one of the main characteristics of Swiss arbitration law compared to other jurisdictions.

After the publication of the draft bill, the Swiss Government held a consultation round with Swiss law associations, law faculties and institutions (inter alia the Swiss Federal Supreme Court) and released an updated draft bill in October 2018. The updated draft bill is now debated in Parliament.


Dr. Valentina Hirsiger-Meier is a senior associate in Baker McKenzie's Zurich office. She advises parties in the field of dispute resolution and general contract law, with a focus on national and international disputes in commercial, construction and corporate law. Valentina has extensive experience as a party representative in commercial disputes before both international arbitral tribunals and Swiss state courts and acts as a part-time judge of the Supreme Court of Liechtenstein.


Lukas Innerebner is currently employed as a law clerk (Auditor) at the Swiss district court of Uster. Previously, Lukas gained experience in complex litigation and international arbitration, M&A transactions and corporate reorganizations as trainee lawyer at Baker McKenzie, Zurich. In 2018, Lukas completed the Geneva LL.M. in International Dispute Resolution with a thesis supervised by Prof. Gabrielle Kaufmann-Kohler.