Gion Jegher

Thirty exciting short stories for witty lawyers available from Schulthess Publisher.

Had enough of Sudoku and crossword puzzles? Here is the alternative for law students and legal practitioners: Prager Dreifuss partner Dr. Gion Jegher just published the fourth edition of the popular case collection on international private law.

Thirty exciting short stories cover the whole spectrum of international private law. The solutions, methodological tips for case handling and a detailed index provide readers with valuable support in dealing with complex conflict of laws issues. Relevant provisions of foreign law can be found in the separate appendix.

The well-proven concept has been revised and supplemented for this new edition. The cases are now arranged in thematic order and indicate their degree of difficulty. The two authors, Dr. Gion Jegher and Prof. Dr. Corinne Widmer Lüchinger (University of Basel), have revised the 25 cases of the previous edition and brought them up to date. Five new cases have been added.

All thirty cases are accompanied once again by brilliant illustrations of artist Thomas Ott. The book is highly valuable for both students and legal practitioners.

You can order the book (in German & PrintPlu§) directly from the publisher.

On Wednesday, March 16, 2022, the second trial run hearing within a week took place at the Zurich office of Prager Dreifuss with counsel for claimant from the University of Zurich (Lara Langer and Hadjar Sbaih) and counsel for respondent from the University of Lucerne (Asia Ponti and Andrea Greub), this time “in personal attendance”.

Our attorneys Marcel Frey (chairman), Gion Jegher and Bernhard Lauterburg constituted the arbitration tribunal. They asked parties' counsel many challenging questions. The young law students gave detailed answers showing great command of the facts and the law. The tribunal was deeply impressed by the professional expertise of the four students. Its only advice to the new generation: More passion and less argument is sometimes more. The verdict in the end: a narrow win for Lucerne.

The second Moot Court practice run this year at Prager Dreifuss! On 17 March 2023, there was another encounter before the arbitral tribunal, the case was the same. The hearing began with the respondent — state-owned Equatoriana Geoscience Ltd — represented by Tsagaanlkham Badamkhand (procedural issues) and Iphigénie Carbonel (substantive issues) from the University of Basel. Respondent presented convincing and well-argued points against the jurisdiction of the tribunal.

The claimant—drone manufacturer Drone Eye plc—was represented by Perla Bachmann (procedural issues) and Anaïs Frischknecht (substantive issues) from the University of Zurich. Counsel for claimant also argued in the very best English, already the briefs submitted by the parties were of the highest standard. The debate turned – inter alia – on the question what qualifies as an aircraft and is therefore excluded from the scope of the applicable treaty on international sales of goods (CISG). The students researched thoroughly the jurisprudence available, assessing decisions on hot air balloons, submarines and used cars.

In the end, the team from the University of Zurich, with its good arguments and convincing presentation, was able to secure a narrow advantage with arbitral tribunal. The arbitration panel consisted of Marcel Frey as chairman and the two party-nominated arbitrators Gion Jegher and Bernhard Lauterburg. We wish both teams every success in the competition!

"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.

"We have been conducting these trials for twelve years now, and the standard has risen massively in recent years," said the Arbitral Tribunal. This is particularly true in today's round with the Claimant SensorX plc represented by Nieves Malpeli (procedural issues) and Philipp Bürgi (substantive issues) of the University of Bern. The defendant Visionic Ltd is no less competently represented, namely by Sofia Heim (procedural issues) and Leonie Thommen (substantive issues) of the University of Basel.

The facts are the same: counsel on both sides have a difficult time, with SensorX challenging its counsels with complete organisational chaos, while Visionic is impressing with an extra dose of naivety in dealing with cyber risks. But the representatives of the claimant and the defendant are not fazed by such details. They impressed the arbitral tribunal – compose of the Prager Dreifuss lawyers Marcel Frey (chairman), Gion Jegher and Bernhard Lauterburg – with their confident and self-assured demeanor, which was supported by their solid knowledge of the arbitration file and the applicable legal sources, topped off with several international reference judgments.

Both sides are bursting with attacking spirit, trying to wrap the arbitrators around their fingers en passant: good eye contact, moderately supportive gestures and an eloquent use of the voice, these elements make the winner. Only today there was none, the four fighters neutralised each other and were allowed to split the prize money between them.

Hybrid hearing with counsel for claimant from the University of St. Gallen (Damian Wyss and Jens Neese) and counsel for respondent from the University of Basel (Roger Reschek and Océane Kessler) on Monday, March 14, 2022, at the Zurich office of Prager Dreifuss:

A sudden withdrawal from an “in person” attendance by the Basel team due to a Covid contact issue challenged us to find an alternate setup for the hearing at short notice. Thanks to our IT hero Patrick Schmidhalter, we were able to prepare a hybrid courtroom with counsel for respondent (Basel) on screen and counsel for claimant (St. Gallen) in person. Our attorneys Marcel Frey (chairman), Gion Jegher and Bernhard Lauterburg formed the arbitral tribunal. They were deeply impressed by the technical language skills and the compelling arguments displayed by the four law students acting as counsel. While the St. Gallen team had a slight advantage in the room, the Basel team was credited with the digital disadvantage. The verdict at the end: a well-deserved draw.

Finally, another student showdown on the 6th floor at Prager Dreifuss! On 8 March 2023, the claimant, drone manufacturer Drone Eye plc, represented by Filippo Börner (procedural issues) and Manuel Constam (substantive issues) from the University of St. Gallen, attended the oral hearing in the arbitral proceedings against respondent, state-owned company Equatoriana Geoscience Ltd, represented by Julia Bischof (procedural issues) and Alex Brückler (substantive issues) from the University of Bern.

In substance, claimant wants to be awarded damages under the purchase and supply agreement for 6 reconnaissance aircraft which it concluded with respondent. However, allegations of corruption, fraud and misrepresentation as well as dubious machinations play an important role alongside questions of jurisdiction and applicable law. The St. Gallen team displayed good file knowledge and communicated well. The students from Bern counterpunched with solid technical details on the purchase objects and valiantly countered the barrage of questions by the tribunal.

Well done! But you can always learn something new. The party representatives were able to take home some valuable input from the arbitrators, who could not come to a unanimous finding and decided to split the prize money equally among both contesting teams.