In its resolution of 12 June 2018, the Board of Directors of the Liechtenstein Institute of Professional Trustees and Fiduciaries appointed an Arbitration Committee. The Arbitration Committee is responsible for the arbitration of any disputes between Board of Directors members; in particular in contested mandate transfer cases as set out in Article 18(3) et seqq. of the Rules of Conduct.
The Board of Directors has elected the following persons as members of the Arbitration Committee for a term of office from 13 June 2018 to 12 June 2020:
- HSH Prince Michael von und zu Liechtenstein (Chairman)
- Dr Stefan Wenaweser (Observer)
- Roger Frick (Observer)
Substitute members of the Arbitration Committee
- Substitute member for the Chairman: Anton Wyss
- Substitute member for Dr Stefan Wenaweser: Gerhard Meier
- Substitute member for Roger Frick: Dr Thomas Nigg
The following provides an excerpt from Article 18 of the Rules of Conduct, which describes the procedure, and an excerpt from Article 7 of the Rules of Conduct, which describes the relevant conflict of interest. The purpose of this regulation is to propose a simple, rapid and cost-effective arbitration procedure. The regulation provides for the delegation of this task by the Board of Directors to the Arbitration Committee. Consequently, a report must be submitted to the Arbitration Committee. Said Arbitration Committee is also responsible for carrying out the subsequent procedure. If no agreement is reached, the Arbitration Committee will issue a recommendation. Failure to comply with such a recommendation may have disciplinary consequences. This ensures that, in justified cases, the timely transfer of discretionary mandates is enabled. In order for this procedure to be adopted, the parties involved (with the exception of the transferring party, see Article 7) must first reach an agreement on this, and a conflict of interest as set out in the correspondingly adapted Article 7 of the Rules of Conduct, or another important reason, must exist. The initial step of the procedure is a joint discussion between Board of Directors members.
Excerpt from Article 18 of the Rules of Conduct:
"3) Should a Professional inform another Professional that the mandate to manage a legal entity should be transferred to them due to a conflict of interest (Article 7) or another important reason, a joint discussion must be held in the interests of the legal entity in question within 30 days of the written application for the transfer of the mandate being submitted. If no mutually agreed solution can be found within this period, the Professional asked to accept the transfer of the mandate must notify the Board of Directors within 14 days, stating the reasons why the transfer of the mandate was refused. Should this period expire, the Professional requesting the transfer of the mandate may report this to the Board of Directors.
4) The Board of Directors will verify whether a conflict of interest (Article 7) or any other reason to justify a transfer of the mandate exists in consultation with the Professionals and issue a recommendation accordingly to the Professionals involved.
5) Failure to comply with the recommendation issued by the Board of Directors regarding the transfer of a mandate to manage a legal entity may constitute a disciplinary offence pursuant to Article 21.
6) The Professionals are subject to the obligation of secrecy pursuant to Article 14 concerning any information presented to the Board of Directors during proceedings.
7) Any costs incurred in connection with the mandate transfer process by the Professional asked to accept the transfer of the mandate pursuant to this Article are to be borne by the Professional, provided that the Board of Directors issues a recommendation for the transfer of the mandate. If the Board of Directors does not issue a recommendation for the transfer of the mandate, the Professional asked to accept the transfer may invoice the legal entity for actual costs incurred, up to a maximum of CHF 5,000."
Excerpt from Article 7 of the Rules of Conduct:
"2) A conflict of interest also exists if the interests of a Professional as a governing body of a legal entity contradict those of the latter. Among other important reasons, this may also be justified by the lack of a relationship of confidence between the Professional and all designated parties involved from legal entities who are not close to the Professional. In this case, the relationship of confidence is to be considered broken."