Litigation, arbitration & dispute resolution

Chevalier & Sciales specialises in financial litigation, often involving high-stakes and complex issues relating to corporate, commercial, banking and financial law and encompassing both jurisdictional and arbitration issues.

We combine creative litigation strategies with business practicality to resolve high-stake disputes. We act for private entities or individuals, companies, investors in contentious, advisory and non-contentious matters, be it before state courts or arbitration tribunals, in litigation as well as in pre-litigation phases or for alternative dispute resolutions. Our strength lies in associating in-depth financial and commercial awareness with legal proceedings expertise. We successfully represented clients in the enforcement of arbitration awards and court decisions, inter alia the enforcement of a €500 million arbitration award against a European State in the Grand-duchy of Luxembourg. Our firm is also active in the field of international arbitration. It has recently secured the defense for the claimants in an investment arbitration regarding the application of the Bilateral investment Treaty between Switzerland and the Czech Republic.

Our range of services includes:

Corporate litigation

  • Directors’ liability.
  • Group liability.
  • Shareholder’s disputes.
  • Provisional and protective measures.

Investment fund-related litigation

  • Prospectus liability.
  • Limited partner and general partner disputes, disputes among fund principals and conflicts of interests.
  • Assisting clients with cases involving investments in relation to the Bernard Madoff case.

Private banking and financial litigation

  • Representing investors in issues arising out of bank-customer relationships.
  • Litigation over compensation for substantial market losses.


  • Assisting clients with the enforcement of arbitration awards.
  • Representation of a client in an ongoing bilateral investment treaty arbitration case involving more than $1 billion.

More information can be found in our brochure (available here).

Highlighted cases

arrow_forwardCurrently representing and assisting a creditor against a state for the validation of attachments made at several Luxembourg banks to enforce a €500 million commercial claim. The decisions are favourable to the creditor subject to complex issues of state immunity in an ongoing case. One of three favourable decisions (civil judgment 2019TALCH10/00094) is available on the internet.

French version / English version 

arrow_forwardSuccessfully represented and assisted a creditor before Luxembourg’s Court of Appeal and Court of Cassation for enforcement of a €500 million commercial award within Luxembourg under the New York Convention of June 10, 1958 on recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitration award. The decisions handed down (decisions 55/17-VIII-exequatur and 70/2018) are publicly available online:

Judgement of the Luxembourg Court of Appeal: decision 55/17-VIII-exequatur.

Judgement of the Luxembourg Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation) 70/2018.

arrow_forwardLitigation regarding compensation for substantial financial market losses, principally resulting from investment in uncovered options and extensive use of Lombard credits.

arrow_forward Diag Human SE vs Czech Republic PCA Case 2018-20 – ongoing case: US$1bn investment treaty claim against Czech Republic arising out of difficulties in enforcing a 2008 Czech commercial arbitration award, including in England [2014] EWHC 1639 (Comm), Austria and the Netherlands, in contrast to successful enforcement in Luxembourg and Belgium.

arrow_forward  Representation of institutional, hedge fund and high net worth investors in Madoff-related fraud litigation.

arrow_forwardCurrently representing a general partner in an ongoing liability case involving two investment funds and a depositary bank. A first decision rendered by Luxembourg’s Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation) annulled, at the general partner’s request, a decision handed down by the Court of Appeal that failed to uphold the general partner’s claim to declare non-binding and unenforceable a previous judgment rendered without the general partner’s involvement. The decision was based on article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights and Article 612 of the Luxembourg procedural code, which the Court of Appeal ruled had been violated (n° 18 2021). It is available at: