{"Signatur": "CH_BGE_005", "Spider": "CH_BGE", "Sprache": "de", "Datum": "2015-05-20", "HTML": {"Datei": "CH_BGE/CH_BGE_005_BGE-141-III-274_2015-05-20.html", "URL": "https://search.bger.ch/ext/eurospider/live/de/php/clir/http/index.php?lang=de&type=highlight_simple_query&page=17&from_date=&to_date=&from_year=2015&to_year=2015&sort=relevance&insertion_date=&from_date_push=&top_subcollection_clir=bge&query_words=&part=all&de_fr=&de_it=&fr_de=&fr_it=&it_de=&it_fr=&orig=&translation=&rank=170&highlight_docid=atf%3A%2F%2F141-III-274%3Ade&number_of_ranks=280&azaclir=clir", "Checksum": "9f3941d54a5bad842f0a92bacf942a73"}, "Scrapedate": "2025-06-16", "Num": ["BGE 141 III 274", "4A_655/2014"], "Kopfzeile": [{"Sprachen": ["de"], "Text": "Bundesgericht (BGE) Band III 20.05.2015 BGE 141 III 274 (4A_655/2014)"}, {"Sprachen": ["fr"], "Text": "Tribunal f\u00e9d\u00e9ral (ATF) Volume III 20.05.2015 BGE 141 III 274 (4A_655/2014)"}, {"Sprachen": ["it"], "Text": "Tribunale federale (DTF) Volume III 20.05.2015 BGE 141 III 274 (4A_655/2014)"}], "Meta": [{"Sprachen": ["de"], "Text": "Eidgenossenschaft Bundesgericht (BGE) Band III"}, {"Sprachen": ["fr"], "Text": "Conf\u00e9deration Tribunal f\u00e9d\u00e9ral (ATF) Volume III"}, {"Sprachen": ["it"], "Text": "Confederazione Tribunale federale (DTF) Volume III"}, {"Sprachen": ["de", "fr", "it"], "Text": "I. zivilrechtlichen Abteilung"}], "Abstract": [{"Sprachen": ["de"], "Text": "Regeste\n<br>Ernennung eines Schiedsgutachters. Unterschied zwischen einem Schiedsgericht und einem Schiedsgutachter (E. 2.4 und 2.5); Art. 356 ZPO bildet keine gesetzliche Grundlage f\u00fcr die richterliche Ernennung eines Schiedsgutachters (E. 2.5)."}, {"Sprachen": ["fr"], "Text": "Regeste\n<br>Nomination d'un expert-arbitre. Distinction entre un tribunal arbitral et un expert-arbitre (consid. 2.4 et 2.5); l'art. 356 CPC ne constitue pas une base l\u00e9gale pour la nomination judiciaire d'un expert-arbitre (consid. 2.5)."}, {"Sprachen": ["it"], "Text": "Regesto\n<br>Nomina di un arbitratore-perito. Differenza fra un tribunale arbitrale e un arbitratore-perito (consid. 2.4 e 2.5); l'art. 356 CPC non costituisce una base legale per la nomina giudiziale di un arbitratore-perito (consid. 2.5)."}], "ScrapyJob": "446973/47/2482", "Zeit UTC": "16.06.2025 03:16:19", "Checksum": "67baede9584396fd5d516dfa216c3d69"}