In a decision rendered on March 2, 2017, the Swiss Supreme Court ruled that a sole arbitrator did not violate fundamental procedural principles and/or a party's right to be appropriately heard by admitting a detailed statement of claim which was filed one day late pursuant to a provisional timetable contained in one of the sole arbitrator's procedural orders.
This decision is in line with leading legal commentators in Switzerland saying that some leniency by an arbitral tribunal in admitting delayed briefs in an international or national arbitration may be acceptable. At the same time, it is important to say that the arbitration parties do not have a right to count with such leniency.
Swiss international arbitration rules are therefore more generous than the Swiss Civil Procedural Code of 2011, which says that delayed procedural actions must be disregarded by a state court in any case, provided that the state court explicitly notified the parties of the legal consequences of a delay. There are though a variety of exemptions to this rule: e.g. a state must extend the deadline for state court cost and similar orders that missed a judicial deadline.
The Swiss Supreme Court did not discuss the topic to what extent the arbitration parties had agreed by their their right to define the legal consequences of a delay. The case did not either present the opportunity to address the much discussed topic in international arbitration as to to what extent local rules e.g. on bank or other holidays should be applied in determining whether a specific deadline had been met. There was no chance either to discuss as to how international arbitral tribunals must handle different time zones in case the arbitral parties do not have an agreeement to that end.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
