1) Request to set aside an arbitral award on the ground that one coarbitrator
failed to attend the deliberation (Swiss PILS -LDIP, Art 190, para
2) Request to set aside an arbitral award on the ground that the parties
were not treated equally and a party was refused the opportunity to be
heard (PILS, Art. 190, para 2, lit.d).
3) Alleged failure by the arbitral tribunal to deal with all the claims
(PILS , Art. 190, para 2, lit.c).
4) Alleged violation of public order on the ground that the arbitrators
had failed to examine a violation of Greek and European competition law
(PILS, Art. 190, para 2, lit.e).
1) The co-arbitrator had the opportunity to attend the deliberation.
That the ICC Court was about to examine a challenge against the chairman
was not sufficient ground for the deliberation between the arbitrators to be
2) Each party had full opportunity to present its case and name its
3) The arbitral tribunal ruled on all claims.
4) Greek and European competition laws are not part of Swiss public
policy and not ground for setting aside under PILS, Art. 190, para 2, lit.e.
Claimant: X (Greece)
Respondent: Y (Netherlands)
Place of arbitration:
ICC Rules (1988)