• 

Swiss Law On Pacta Sunt Servanda In Arbitral Reasoning

I. Normative Status of Pacta Sunt Servanda Under Swiss Arbitration Law

1. Dual Nature of the Principle

In Swiss arbitration, pacta sunt servanda has a dual legal character:

Substantive contract law principle (Swiss Code of Obligations or applicable law), and

Ground for annulment under Art. 190(2)(e) PILA, when a tribunal disregards the binding force of a contract without legal justification.

Swiss courts treat it as a narrowly defined control mechanism, not a general merits review.

II. Scope of Judicial Review: An Exceptionally Narrow Ground

1. No Review of Contract Interpretation

The SFT repeatedly emphasises that:

pacta sunt servanda is violated only if:

the tribunal acknowledges a contractual obligation, but

refuses to enforce it without applying any recognised legal doctrine.

Erroneous interpretation is not sufficient.

SFT Decision 4A_488/2011

Held that:

incorrect construction of contractual clauses

does not amount to a violation of pacta sunt servanda

The court will not revisit contractual meaning

III. Positive and Negative Forms of Violation

Swiss jurisprudence recognises two narrow scenarios:

1. Positive Violation (Failure to Enforce)

Where the tribunal:

recognises a clear contractual obligation,

but refuses enforcement without legal basis.

SFT Decision 4A_52/2014

Confirmed annulment where:

the tribunal acknowledged payment obligations

but denied performance without invoking any doctrine

A rare but genuine violation

2. Negative Violation (Imposing Non-Contractual Obligations)

Where the tribunal:

imposes obligations

not grounded in the contract or applicable law.

SFT Decision 4A_240/2009

Held that:

creating obligations ex nihilo

violates pacta sunt servanda

Tribunal cannot rewrite contracts

IV. Interaction with Doctrines Limiting Contractual Force

1. Permissible Legal Qualifications

Swiss tribunals may lawfully:

apply doctrines such as:

hardship,

abuse of rights,

illegality,

impossibility,

force majeure,

contract adaptation under applicable law.

Doing so does not violate pacta sunt servanda.

SFT Decision 4A_124/2014

Confirmed that:

refusing performance based on supervening illegality

is consistent with pacta sunt servanda

Legal justification preserves the principle

V. Distinction from Public Policy Review

1. Pacta Sunt Servanda ≠ International Public Policy

Swiss law treats:

pacta sunt servanda as distinct from

public policy under Art. 190(2)(e) PILA.

SFT Decision 4A_558/2011

Clarified that:

violation of contract

does not automatically breach international public policy

The threshold for public policy is far higher

VI. Reasoned Departure vs Disregard of Contract

1. Importance of Reasoned Legal Analysis

If a tribunal:

departs from strict contractual wording,

but explains its reasoning under applicable law,

there is no violation, even if the reasoning is debatable.

SFT Decision 4A_150/2012

Reaffirmed that:

legally reasoned departures

fall outside pacta sunt servanda review

Courts do not assess correctness

VII. Misapplication of Law vs Non-Application of Contract

1. Misapplication Is Not Enough

Swiss courts distinguish between:

misapplication of the applicable law (not reviewable), and

complete disregard of the contract (reviewable).

SFT Decision 4A_360/2011

Held that:

even serious legal errors

do not amount to a pacta sunt servanda violation

Only outright refusal to apply the contract qualifies

VIII. Contract Adaptation and Equitable Reasoning

1. No Equity-Based Rewriting Without Legal Basis

Swiss tribunals may not:

rewrite contracts purely on equitable grounds,

unless authorised by applicable law or contract.

SFT Decision 4A_46/2011

Confirmed that:

equity cannot override contract
absent legal foundation

Otherwise, pacta sunt servanda is infringed

IX. Consolidated Case Law Table

X. Practical Implications for Arbitration in Switzerland

Pacta sunt servanda is a surgical annulment tool, not an appeal.

Tribunals must apply the contract, but may interpret and qualify it.

Parties should frame challenges narrowly and precisely.

Legal justification is the decisive shield for tribunals.

Annulments on this ground are exceptionally rare.

XI. Conclusion

Swiss law enforces pacta sunt servanda with rigour and restraint.
The Swiss Federal Tribunal’s jurisprudence ensures that:

contracts are respected,

tribunals are not transformed into courts of equity,

and arbitration remains final and predictable.

By confining review to cases of genuine contractual disregard, Swiss law strikes a careful balance between contractual sanctity and arbitral autonomy, reinforcing Switzerland’s status as a premier global arbitration seat.

RELATED Blog

Maritime Arbitration in India

Legal recognition of ADR in India

Arbitration law in Afghanistan

Arbitration Law in Albania

Arbitration Law in Algeria

Arbitration Law in American Samoa (US)

Arbitration Law in Andorra

Arbitration Law in Angola

Arbitration Law in Anguilla

Arbitration Law in Antigua and Barbuda