Notice: We are currently performing maintenance to improve the italaw platform. The site remains fully accessible. Thank you for your patience.

Hiroshi Osumi v. Switzerland, Procedural Order No. 1, July 10, 2026

10 Jul 2026
Hiroshi Osumi v. Swiss Confederation, ICSID Case No. ARB/26/1
Procedural Order No. 1
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Procedural Order No. 1
Participants listed are for this document only and may not include all participants involved in the entire case. Always consult the original documents.
Claimant appointee
Respondent appointee
Tribunal/Panel chair
Sole Arbitrator
ICSID Annulment Committee president
ICSID Annulment Committee members
WTO Appellate Body members
WTO Appellate Body chair
Judges
Claimant's law firm
Respondent's law firm
Other counsel
Claimant's expert
Claimant's expert firm
Respondent's expert
Respondent's expert firm
Claimant's witness
Respondent's witness
Other witnesses
Tribunal secretary
Tribunal assistant
Third-party funder
Country
Print reporter
Document Summary
Procedural Order No. 1
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

Procedural Background

This Procedural Order No. 1 establishes the procedural framework for the arbitration proceedings conducted under the ICSID Arbitration Rules (2022). Following the first session held on June 29, 2026, the Tribunal issued this Order to govern matters including the applicable arbitration rules, the routing of communications, the submission of pleadings, and the logistical parameters for hearings and document production.

Document Production and Claimant's Pending Request

The Order sets forth the standard mechanism for document production utilizing a Stern Schedule, guided by the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration. Notably, the Tribunal addressed a pending request made by the Claimant in its Request for Arbitration for the production of 592 documents referenced in a report by a Swiss Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry. The Tribunal denied this early request without prejudice. In its reasoning, the Tribunal emphasized that at this nascent stage of the proceedings, prior to the Respondent filing its defense, it was unable to properly assess the relevance and materiality of the requested documents. Furthermore, the Tribunal found no urgent necessity to order production before the standard document production phase.

Procedural Calendar and Bifurcation Scenarios

The Tribunal adopted a comprehensive procedural calendar, detailed in Annex B, which accommodates multiple procedural trajectories. The schedule provides specific timelines for scenarios in which the Respondent requests bifurcation, and subsequent tracks depending on whether such bifurcation is granted or denied by the Tribunal. The calendar also incorporates provisions for potential non-disputing party submissions by Japan pursuant to Article 94(10) of the Japan-Switzerland Free Trade Agreement.