Rechtsmittel gegen Entscheide des juge d'appui bei der internationalen Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit der Schweiz

The author examines whether and by which means the decisions handed down by the State judge giving his support to the arbitral proceeding (juge d'appui) may be appealed. Every relevant Article in the PILA (Private International Law Act) is addressed and analyzed in this regard (Art. 179(2) and (3), Art. 180(3), Art. 183(2), Art. 184(3) and Art. 185) by reference to the present legal doctrine and case law. Concerning the stages of appeal, the view is held that by direct or analogous application of Art. 356(2) CPC (Civil Procedure Code) the juge d'appui has jurisdiction as the sole instance of the Canton to render decisions in support of the arbitral tribunal. On the federal level however, the parties shall have the right to appeal against these decisions by filing a civil law appeal before the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, with the exception of most decisions given by juge d'appui within the meaning of Art. 180(3) PILA. As to this federal appeal, it is established that the case law of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court under the FTA (Act on the Federal Tribunal) indicates the Court's inclination to qualify both negative and positive decisions issued by the juge d'appui as final decisions in terms of Art. 90 FTA. In reference to the upcoming revision of the PILA's 12th Chapter the author concludes that the legislator might implement some clarifications in the current legal framework. It seems particularly advisable to ensure that all relevant Articles in the PILA regarding decisions of the juge d'appui explicitly reference to Art. 356(2) CPC. Moreover, the author is of the opinion that it would also be expedient to specify the

Swiss Patent Jurisprudence 2012

The new Swiss Federal Patent Court, with nationwide first-instance jurisdiction over all civil patent matters, has been operating since January 1, 2012. This article reviews and contextualizes the most important patent cases published in 2012 by the Swiss Federal Patent Court and the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. More specifically, the article covers cases on issues such as the evidentiary status of party expert opinions, the formal requirements for requests for injunctive relief, the infringement and non-obviousness tests employed by the Swiss Federal Patent Court, the use of reports and statements from technical judges in lieu of expert opinions, and the procedural devices for the pre-trial taking of evidence, in particular the new patent-specific device of precise description. The author suggests that designing the Federal Patent Court to include technically trained judges may lead to a more automatic adoption of the practices and case law of the European Patent Office. The article concludes that the revamped Swiss patent litigation system has the potential of turning Switzerland into a competitive venue for the adjudication of patent matters in Europe.