Vis Moot Court — The first Trial Run at Prager Dreifuss in 2024

"While we're here, we might as well resolve two disputes, right?" This is one of the arguments put forward by the Claimant SensorX plc, represented by Marko Savkovic (procedural issues) and Niklas Graefen (substantive issues) of the University of St. Gallen. "To the contrary, the two transactions have nothing to do with each other, the second request is not covered by the arbitration clause!", is the reply of the Respondent, Visionic Ltd, represented by Nathalie Kneisel (procedural issues) and Giovanni Giusti (substantive issues) of the University of Zurich.

And then there's this: a hacker used a spoof e-mail to divert USD 38 million from Visionic, which believed it had paid this to its seller, SensorX. Visionic had ordered sensors for cars in this amount, SensorX had delivered them and was therefore expecting payment. In its defence, Visionic accuses its business partner of being partly to blame for the dilemma, since the hacker was only able to create the detailed fraudulent spoof e-mail after a successful cyber-attack on SensorX. SensorX had kept quiet about the attack, leaving Visionic in the dark and transferring the money to the hacker's account.

The arbitration tribunal – the Prager Dreifuss lawyers Marcel Frey (chairman), Gion Jegher and Bernhard Lauterburg – noted that both parties had not given sufficient attention to the cyber risks. Who will win this dispute? Based on the more convincing oral presentation, the St. Gallen team walked away with a slim lead, with the debate continiuing into the reception that followed.