Arbitration In University-Industry Collaboration
I. Legal Character of University–Industry Collaborations in Switzerland
1. Hybrid Nature of the Relationship
University–industry collaborations typically involve:
public or private universities,
research institutes,
industrial or commercial partners.
They commonly address:
joint research and development (R&D),
funding and milestone payments,
ownership and exploitation of intellectual property (IP),
confidentiality and publication rights,
technology transfer and licensing.
Swiss tribunals assess such collaborations through a functional legal classification, determining whether the university is acting:
under public law (acta iure imperii), or
under private law (acta iure gestionis).
This distinction is decisive for arbitrability.
II. Arbitrability of University–Industry Disputes
2. Economic-Interest Test under Swiss Arbitration Law
Under Article 177(1) PILA, any dispute involving an economic interest is arbitrable. Swiss jurisprudence applies this test broadly.
Case Law 1: ATF 118 II 353
Holding: Arbitrability depends on the economic substance of the dispute, not the institutional identity of the parties.
Application: Disputes over research funding, royalties, or termination compensation are arbitrable.
Relevance: Scientific or educational objectives do not negate patrimonial interests.
III. Public Universities and Consent to Arbitration
3. Universities Acting under Private Law
Swiss tribunals consistently hold that public universities may agree to arbitration when they enter private-law contracts.
Case Law 2: ATF 129 III 727
Holding: Public-law entities are bound by arbitration clauses when acting iure gestionis.
University Context: R&D contracts, sponsored research, and technology-transfer agreements fall within private law.
Limit: Sovereign grant decisions remain non-arbitrable.
IV. Scope and Interpretation of Arbitration Clauses
4. Broad Interpretation of Arbitration Agreements
Swiss tribunals interpret arbitration clauses liberally, especially in technically complex collaboration agreements.
Case Law 3: ATF 133 III 235
Holding: Arbitration clauses extend to all disputes with a sufficient factual and legal connection to the contract.
University–Industry Impact:
publication delays,
breach of confidentiality,
misuse of research results.
Rationale: Ensures procedural unity in multi-issue collaborations.
V. Intellectual Property and Exploitation Disputes
5. Arbitration of IP Ownership and Licensing
University–industry collaborations frequently generate disputes concerning:
ownership of inventions,
patent filing responsibility,
licensing revenues.
Swiss tribunals treat these as fully arbitrable private-law disputes.
Case Law 4: ATF 132 III 389
Holding: Contractual allocation of IP rights is arbitrable.
Academic Context: Even publicly funded research outputs may be contractually allocated.
Restriction: Arbitrators must respect mandatory employee-invention and registration rules.
VI. Funding Withdrawal, Termination, and Claw-Back Claims
6. Good Faith and Proportionality Review
Industry partners may terminate funding for alleged non-performance, while universities contest repayment demands.
Case Law 5: ATF 132 III 186
Holding: Contractual discretion must be exercised in accordance with good faith.
University–Industry Application: Minor deviations from research plans do not automatically justify termination or full repayment.
Principle: Protection against opportunistic termination.
VII. Mandatory Law and Academic Freedom
7. Limits to Arbitration
Swiss tribunals ensure arbitration does not undermine:
academic freedom,
mandatory employment protections,
integrity of scientific research.
Case Law 6: ATF 136 III 345
Holding: Arbitration clauses are valid only if mandatory legal safeguards are preserved.
Application:
funding and IP disputes → arbitrable,
disciplinary or purely academic-freedom claims → limited arbitrability.
Balancing: Contractual autonomy vs public-interest values.
VIII. Multi-Party and Consortium Collaborations
8. Complex Project Structures
Large university–industry projects often involve:
multiple academic institutions,
industrial sponsors,
affiliated spin-offs.
Swiss arbitral practice permits:
joinder of parties,
consolidation of proceedings,
coordinated interpretation of interlinked agreements.
Case Law 7: ATF 140 III 477
Holding: Procedural complexity does not defeat arbitrability.
Effect: Consortium governance and funding-allocation disputes may be efficiently arbitrated.
IX. Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards
9. Narrow Review under Article 190(2) PILA
Swiss Federal Supreme Court exercises minimal post-award intervention.
Case Law 8: ATF 141 III 229
Holding: Errors in technical or scientific assessment do not amount to public-policy violations.
Result: Courts will not re-evaluate scientific judgments or research strategies.
Outcome: Strong finality of awards.
X. Procedural Characteristics of University–Industry Arbitration
Swiss arbitral tribunals frequently:
appoint scientific and IP experts,
protect confidentiality of unpublished research,
tailor evidentiary rules for technical material,
issue declaratory relief clarifying ownership or licensing rights.
Arbitration is preferred because it offers:
neutrality in cross-border collaborations,
technical competence,
confidentiality of sensitive research data.
XI. Synthesis: Swiss Approach to Arbitration in University–Industry Collaboration
Swiss tribunals’ approach is defined by:
Broad arbitrability of economically relevant collaboration disputes
Acceptance of arbitration involving public universities acting privately
Liberal interpretation of arbitration clauses
Full arbitrability of IP and exploitation disputes
Strict respect for good faith and proportionality
Protection of mandatory academic and public-interest norms
Minimal judicial interference post-award
Concluding Observation
Switzerland provides a highly arbitration-friendly and technically sophisticated framework for resolving university–industry collaboration disputes. By balancing contractual autonomy, academic freedom, and public-interest safeguards, Swiss tribunals ensure that arbitration remains an effective and credible mechanism for modern research-driven partnerships.
RELATED Blog
comments