Legal Guidance and Research / Experts / Johannes Landbrecht
Johannes Landbrecht#10326

Dr Johannes Landbrecht

Walder Wyss
Johannes Landbrecht acts as counsel in complex international arbitration proceedings and also sits as arbitrator (e.g. under the ICC, LCIA, and Swiss Rules). Experienced in a wide variety of commercial disputes, under most of the leading arbitration rules, and involving more than a dozen different jurisdictions from around the globe, Johannes has developed expertise especially in energy and IP. He is qualified in civil law (Germany and Switzerland) as well as common law jurisdictions (Barrister, England & Wales, non-practising). He is recommended by clients and peers inter alia in WWL Future Leaders Arbitration and WWL Switzerland (Arbitration). For details see https://www.walderwyss.com/en/lawyers/johannes.landbrecht.

Practice Area

Panel

  • Contributing Author

Qualified Year

  • 2008

Experience

  • GABRIEL Arbitration, Zurich (2017 - 2022)
  • Rajah & Tann, Singapore (2017 - 2017)
  • LALIVE, Geneva (2012 - 2017)
  • Jones Day, Paris and Frankfurt/Main (2008 - 2012)

Membership

  • Swiss Arbitration Association (ASA)
  • German Arbitration Institute (DIS)
  • Austrian Arbitration Association (Arb|Aut)

Qualifications

  • MJur, First State Examination in Law (2006)
  • Second State Examination in Law (2008)
  • LLB (2011)
  • PhD (2011)

Education

  • University of Constance (2001-2006)
  • Court of Appeal Karlsruhe (2006-2008)
  • University of London International Programmes (2008-2011)
  • University of Geneva (2009-2011)
  • University of Fribourg/Switzerland (2015-2022)

2 Contributions by Johannes Landbrecht

State immunity under Swiss law: jurisdiction, enforcement against state assets, and arbitration (ICSID/New York Convention)—acta iure imperii/gestionis and the sufficient Swiss connection requirement
PRACTICE NOTES
State immunity under Swiss law: jurisdiction, enforcement against state assets, and arbitration (ICSID/New York Convention)—acta iure imperii/gestionis and the sufficient Swiss connection requirement
Note: the Swiss cases referred to below are not reported by LexisNexis®. Introduction and the Structure of this Note The question of immunity arises most often in relation to diplomats, and also consular officials and employees. Immunity is enjoyed by foreign states; numerous intergovernmental and international organisations under headquarters agreements with the Swiss Confederation; the assets of foreign central banks; and state cultural property, whether brought to Switzerland with or without a return guarantee. No immunity applies to foreign state-owned enterprises or to ordinary foreign state-owned banks. Immunity operates solely as a shield. Where an individual, entity, or state benefits from it, the host state may neither exercise jurisdiction over them nor enforce against their assets. Nevertheless, they remain part of legal life and may choose to participate in legal transactions within this forum. Swiss law, like most systems, distinguishes between immunity from jurisdiction and immunity from enforcement, and under Swiss law neither is absolute. The implications of public entities being involved in Swiss arbitration proceedings are to be assessed separately...
Arbitration
Switzerland: Jurisdiction challenges in arbitration; courts’ refusal of anti-suit/anti-arbitration relief; enforcing arbitration agreements, damages risk, tribunal anti-suit powers, and key PILA/CCP reforms (2021–2025)
PRACTICE NOTES
Switzerland: Jurisdiction challenges in arbitration; courts’ refusal of anti-suit/anti-arbitration relief; enforcing arbitration agreements, damages risk, tribunal anti-suit powers, and key PILA/CCP reforms (2021–2025)
Note: the Swiss cases mentioned below are not included in LexisNexis® reports. Introduction Swiss domestic and Swiss international arbitration Swiss law draws a line between domestic and international forms of ‘Swiss’ arbitration. The former is set out in Part 3 of the Swiss Code of Civil Procedure of 19 December 2008 (the ‘Swiss CCP’; minor revisions to Part 3 most recently took effect on 1 January 2025), while the latter is governed by Chapter 12 of the Swiss Private International Law Act of 18 December 1987 (the ‘PILA’; overhauled in 2021). Each framework addresses largely the same topics as the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration of 1985, as amended in 2006 (the ‘Model Law’), yet neither follows the Model Law’s architecture, preserving their autonomy and distinctive character. Swiss arbitration legislation applies solely to proceedings seated in Switzerland, which necessitates rules for fixing the seat. Article 176(3) PILA therefore provides, aiming to cater for all eventualities: ‘The seat of the arbitration shall be determined by the parties or by the arbitral institution designated by the parties, or, failing which, by the arbitral tribunal.’ A near-identical clause appears in Article 355(1) Swiss CCP...
Arbitration
Expert page AD
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.