LIECHTENSTEIN Law and Practice Contributed by: Moritz Blasy, Nicolai Binkert, Simon Ott and Christian Scheffknecht, Schurti Partners Attorneys at Law Ltd
dered in Liechtenstein must not contravene public policy in Liechtenstein (“ ordre public ”). A rendered arbitral award which is not in accordance with Liech - tenstein public policy is vulnerable to being set aside by the Liechtenstein Court of Appeal. In regard to punitive damages, it has to be said that this remedy is unknown under Liechtenstein law and might be considered a violation of the Liechtenstein public policy. 10.3 Recovering Interest and Legal Costs The recovery of interest being a question of the appli - cable substantive law (rather than the procedural law) from a Liechtenstein law perspective, the Liechten - stein Arbitration Law does not contain any provisions in this respect. In regard to the entitlement of a party to recover costs, the Liechtenstein Arbitration Law provides that the arbitral tribunal shall decide on the recovery of costs upon termination of the arbitration proceedings, unless the parties have agreed otherwise. Concern - ing the allocation of the costs between the parties, the arbitral tribunal has to take into consideration all aspects of the case, in particular the outcome of the proceedings. The pertinent provision of the Liechtenstein Rules states that the arbitral tribunal shall decide on the costs of arbitration in its arbitral award. The Liechten - stein Rules are based on the so-called “loser pays” principle. However, the arbitral tribunal may decide on a different allocation of costs if it considers it appropri - ate in light of the circumstances of the case.
tion Law provides only for one ordinary instance for setting aside the award (ie, the Liechtenstein Court of Appeal). The procedure is public in principle, but the public may be excluded upon request of a party if the party has a legitimate interest. Moreover, any person involved in the proceedings may ban third parties from being granted access to the files. In summary, the distinctive features of the Liechten - stein Arbitration Law ensure that swift and confiden - tial arbitral proceedings are not thwarted by lengthy and public proceedings before the ordinary courts. As mentioned, the Court of Appeal renders a final decision against which no further ordinary appeal is admissible. While, in theory, a complaint to the Con - stitutional Court in case of a violation of constitutional law is possible, the Constitutional Court has held that arbitral awards are only to a very limited extent bound by constitutional norms. In particular, an arbitral award will not be reviewed on the grounds of arbitrariness. Consequently, the chances of success with a consti - tutional complaint are very limited. 11.2 Excluding/Expanding the Scope of Appeal As a matter of the Liechtenstein Arbitration Law, the parties cannot agree to exclude or expand the scope of appeal or challenge to the ordinary courts. On the other hand, it is within the autonomy of the parties to agree to a further arbitral tribunal as a second instance. 11.3 Standard of Judicial Review The Liechtenstein Court of Appeal does not review the merits of the case.
11. Review of an Award 11.1 Grounds for Appeal
12. Enforcement of an Award 12.1 New York Convention
The grounds for challenging an arbitral award, accord - ing to the Liechtenstein Arbitration Law, correspond largely with the grounds provided for in the UNCI - TRAL Model Law. Notably, the Liechtenstein Arbitra - tion Law contains two significant deviations from the UNCITRAL Model Law in this respect: (i) the challenge must be submitted within four weeks of the date of receipt of the award; and (ii) the Liechtenstein Arbitra -
Liechtenstein signed and ratified the New York Con - vention in 2011, but has submitted a reservation on reciprocity. Unlike some other signatories to the Con - vention, Liechtenstein has not submitted a reservation on commercial trade.
535 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook