Xavier Favre-Bulle

Lenz & Staehelin

Geneva www.lenzstaehelin.com

xavier.favre-bulle@lenzstaehelin.com Tel: +41 58 450 70 00

Biography

Dr Favre-Bulle has more than 25 years of experience in dispute resolution and has been involved in some 255 arbitrations as counsel or arbitrator (eg, sales agreements, distribution, licences, shareholders agreements, postM&A disputes, etc, in various business industries). At Lenz & Staehelin in Geneva, Dr FavreBulle leads the Arbitration group and the sports law sector. He is president of the Arbitration Court of the Swiss Arbitration Centre and senior vice-chair of the IBA Arbitration Committee.

What inspired you to pursue a career in law, and take a special interest in sports law?

A good mix between chance and opportunities – hardly a true vocation. What matters in my view and what makes us successful is to become passionate when discovering new fields, such as contract law and dispute resolution when I studied law. My interest in sports law came through the handling of (fascinating) arbitration cases before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

Looking back over your career, what is the most interesting sports case you have been a part of, and why?

Difficult to choose… I liked acting in cases for the Fédération Equestre Internationale (FEI) dealing with the welfare of horses; I had an Asian nation behind me when defending a national hero in taekwondo; governance and ethics issues are quite sensitive and one is usually faced with strong and well-known individuals whose defence is similar to what is resorted to in high-profile criminal cases.

Can force majeure claims arising from the coronavirus pandemic still be brought in the near future or has the ship sailed on such claims?

Force majeure is still there, but used in a wider manner, prayed in aid for different sorts of consequences resulting from the crisis. The pandemic had the particularity of reviving the debate around the definition and scope of application of force majeure.

What further steps can be taken to ensure that arbitration professionals are more comfortable using arbitration hosting platforms and other technology increasingly used in the space?

Reliability, quality and simplicity remain key requirements. More options and speed can certainly be nice to have, but if the risk is that the system is down for a while or that the use is too complex or sometimes with poor output, the appetite for new technologies may not grow exponentially.

Arbitrator independence and disclosure is a hot topic, with concerns that standards are opaque and restrictive. Do you agree?

No. The importance of this topic is exaggerated. There exist solid standards (such as the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest) and good practice. Experienced arbitrators know what to disclose – neither to little nor too much – using pragmatism and common sense. A lack of impartiality/independence should not be presumed and become a weapon systematically used to derail an arbitration.

Given the increasing amount of conflicts arbitrators and counsel are experiencing, should there be a set of universal conflict principles across arbitration institutions?

I do not believe in universal concepts. We already have good standards aimed at applying worldwide, but conflicts must then be assessed on a case-by-case basis. There must necessarily be some discretion left to the arbitration institutions deciding on conflict issues and to the courts for review.

Could e-discovery technologies be used in case assessment for smaller cases? What benefits would this bring?

Discovery, whatever its form is – electronic or not – is what makes arbitration expensive. Small cases should be conducted according to a process limiting document production.

What would you like to achieve that you haven’t done so already?

Deal with a rather complex case in a much more original and efficient way than what one sees in all commercial cases: shorter submissions, less witness statements, less or lighter expert reports, more conferencing and interaction with the tribunal throughout the proceedings, ending up with an award with summary reasons, accepted by the parties based on the trust placed in the arbitrators having fully understood the dispute and how to resolve it.

Peers and clients say: “He is an outstanding arbitrator” “Xavier is a fantastic arbitration practitioner” “He provides brilliant counsel in complex commercial disputes”