Comparisons: London, Singapore, Frankfurt and Hamburg, Geneva

London

The Commercial Court of England and Wales is the model against which every international commercial court measures itself. It was created in 1895 through a “Notice as to Commercial Cases” issued by the judges of the Queen’s Bench Division, after pressure from the City of London and the business community, and its first judge was J. C. Mathew. Since the early 1990s more than three quarters of the cases issued in the court have involved at least one foreign party. In the 1970s the court developed the Mareva injunction, the ancestor of the modern worldwide freezing order.¹ London and Zurich therefore share the date of origin of their commercial courts in the second half of the nineteenth century, and both courts were created at the request of merchants who wanted judges with commercial experience. They chose different paths to that goal. London relied on specialist professional judges drawn from the commercial bar, whereas Zurich placed businesspeople on the bench beside professional judges. London’s strengths lie in its procedural tools, its body of precedent and the English language. Zurich’s strengths lie in speed, cost, the settlement culture and a two-instance structure that brings finality sooner.

Singapore

The Singapore International Commercial Court was officially launched on 5 January 2015, after a committee report of November 2013 and a public consultation. Its bench combines specialist commercial judges from Singapore with international judges from both civil law and common law traditions. It allows the joinder of third parties, which arbitration cannot easily achieve, and positions itself as complementing the Singapore International Arbitration Centre.² The comparison with Zurich is instructive. Singapore created a new court with international judges in order to build a reputation from a standing start. Zurich, which already possessed a respected commercial court, has chosen to open that court to international cases and the English language without appointing foreign judges. The Zurich model is cheaper and more modest. Its success will depend on whether international parties trust a Swiss bench to the same degree as they trust Swiss arbitration, and on whether Zurich’s commercial judges can be deployed in English-language proceedings in sufficient numbers.

Frankfurt, Hamburg and the German commercial courts

Germany has moved in the same direction at the same time. The Act to Strengthen Germany as a Venue for Justice (Justizstandort-Stärkungsgesetz) entered into force on 1 April 2025. It allows each federal state to establish one commercial court at the level of a higher regional court for commercial disputes with a value in dispute of at least EUR 500,000, and commercial chambers at the regional courts. Proceedings may be conducted in English. Appeals lie directly to the Federal Court of Justice without leave, and the procedure provides for case management conferences, verbatim records and enhanced protection of trade secrets. By July 2025 nine federal states had established commercial courts.³ Hamburg opened its commercial court at the Hanseatic Higher Regional Court on 15 April 2025, and Frankfurt followed on 1 July 2025, while Baden-Württemberg had already set up commercial courts in Stuttgart and Mannheim in 2020.⁴

The parallels with Zurich are striking. Both reforms were adopted within two years of each other, both respond to the dominance of London and of arbitration in international commercial disputes, and both rely on existing judges who are able to work in English. The German model has a higher threshold, a stronger emphasis on the English-language appeal and no lay element, since the traditional German chambers for commercial matters with honorary judges are not the vehicle chosen for the new courts. For parties from Germany, the most important foreign clientele of the Zurich financial centre, the choice between Frankfurt and Zurich will turn on the governing law, the location of assets and the relative weight given to speed and settlement.

Geneva

Geneva, the subject of the companion volume, has no commercial court in the sense of Article 6 CPC. Commercial disputes are decided there by the ordinary courts, and appeals pass through the cantonal Court of Justice before reaching the Federal Supreme Court.⁵ Practitioners in Geneva have promoted the establishment of a commercial court with an international chamber, but the project had not reached the stage of legislation by 2026.⁶ In arbitration the two cities are close competitors. Geneva hosts the management of the Swiss Arbitration Centre and a large community of arbitration practitioners with strong links to French-speaking and international organisations. Zurich leads in the number of institutional cases under the Swiss Rules and in disputes involving German-speaking parties and the banking and insurance industries. Seen together, the two centres complement one another and explain why Switzerland ranks among the three leading countries of seat in the ICC statistics.

Notes

1. Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, “The History of the Commercial Court”, https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/business-and-property-courts/commercial-court/about-the-commercial-court/the-history-of-the-commercial-court/. ↩
2. Singapore Judiciary, “Establishment of the SICC”, https://www.judiciary.gov.sg/singapore-international-commercial-court/about-the-sicc/establishment-of-the-sicc. ↩
3. Morgan Lewis, “The Introduction of Commercial Courts and Commercial Chambers in Germany” (July 2025), https://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/2025/07/the-introduction-of-commercial-courts-and-commercial-chambers-in-germany. ↩
4. UEPO.de, “Hamburg eröffnet Commercial Court beim OLG und Commercial Chambers am Landgericht”, 18 April 2025, https://uepo.de/2025/04/18/hamburg-eroeffnet-commercial-court-beim-olg-und-commercial-chambers-am-landgericht/, and UEPO.de, “Gerichtssprache Englisch: OLG Frankfurt richtet Commercial Court und Commercial Chamber ein”, 12 February 2025, https://uepo.de/2025/02/12/gerichtssprache-englisch-olg-frankfurt-richtet-commercial-court-und-commercial-chamber-ein/. ↩
5. LAW.CH, “Handelsgerichte der Schweiz”, loc. cit. (commercial courts only in Zurich, Bern, St. Gallen and Aargau). The Geneva court structure itself was not separately verified. ↩
6. Pestalozzi, “Proceedings in English before Swiss State Courts Soon a Reality in Bern and Zurich”, loc. cit. ↩

For general information only. This article does not constitute legal or tax advice, does not replace advice on an individual case and creates no lawyer-client relationship. It reflects the legal position as of September 2025.