Court of Appeal

Summary: In a recent ruling by the Svea Court of Appeal, the Court of Appeal confirmed that the right to an oral hearing under the Swedish Arbitration Act (the “SAA") is technology neutral and allows for remote hearings. The respondent in the arbitration challenged the final arbitral award...

Challenge of arbitral award rendered in Stockholm on 30 March 2020.

Challenge and invalidity of an arbitral award; presently the question of written observations by the European Commission etc.

Challenge of arbitral award rendered in Stockholm on 21 January 2019

Challenge to and invalidity of arbitral award; now the matter of application for a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice

Challenge of arbitral award; now the issue of dismissal of new challenge grounds etc.

Summary: The Republic of Kazakhstan (Kazakhstan) applied for a summons, moving that the Court of Appeal as per item 1, alternatively item 2, of the first paragraph of Section 33 of the Swedish Arbitration Act should declare an arbitral award (the Award) invalid. As legal grounds for its motion,...

Summary The Appellant (Respondent in the arbitration) challenged the Final Award. The original dispute arose out of the loan agreement between the Claimant and the Respondent, which contained two dispute resolution provisions: one referring to a state court and the other to arbitration. The...

Summary: The parties entered into two agreements regarding supply and transit of natural gas. A dispute arose between the parties, resulting in the parties filing requests for arbitration at the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC). Three arbitral awards were...

The Kingdom of Spain urged the Court of Appeal to request a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union in order to clarify whether Article 26 of the ECT is applicable between the member states of the European Union, and if that is the case, whether Article 26 of the ECT...

The translation was provided by Mannheimer Swartling. Summary: The Respondent to the arbitration challenged the separate arbitral award and the final arbitral award. The two challenge cases were heard together by the Svea Court of Appeal. The challenging party requested the court to declare...

The Claimant as a losing party in the arbitration appealed the decision of the District Court regarding the compensation to an arbitrator. The Claimant argued that the arbitrator’s fees should be reduced based on an alleged lack of impartiality and independence, stressing that the arbitrator...

Summary The Claimant in the arbitration challenged both the Partial Award and the Final Award. The Claimant requested the court to declare both the Partial Award in its entirety, and parts of the Final Award invalid, and as an alternative, set aside. The Claimant argued that the arbitral...

Summary: The Claimant in the arbitration challenged the arbitral award claiming that the award should be (i) declared wholly or partially invalid, pursuant to item 2 of the first paragraph of Section 33 of the Swedish Arbitration Act (1999:116); (ii) wholly or partially annulled pursuant of...

Summary: The Respondent to the arbitration (challenging party) challenged the award under item 2 of Section 34 of the Swedish Arbitration Act (SAA), requesting that the Court of Appeal annul the award in its entirety, or alternatively in part. The challenging party argued three separate...

Summary: The Respondent to the arbitration (challenging party) challenged the award under item 2 of Section 34 of the Swedish Arbitration Act, requesting that the Court of Appeal annul paragraphs 67, 71 and part of paragraph 73 of the arbitral award. The challenging party argued that the...

Summary: The Respondent to the arbitration challenged the arbitration award under item 2 of Section 34 of the Swedish Arbitration Act. The challenging party moved that the Court of Appeal should annual items 1a, 1b, 3, 5 and 6 of the arbitration award. The challenging party argued that the...

Summary: A party challenged the arbitration award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, arguing that the arbitrator exceeded his mandate by basing his decision on a legal provision not referenced by the parties. The party also argued that the arbitrator’s failure to inform the parties that he...

Summary: A party challenged the arbitration award under item 2 of Section 34 of the Swedish Arbitration Act. The party argued that the tribunal committed procedural errors and exceeded its mandate by (1) failing to be impartial in relation to the parties, (2) basing its decision on circumstances...

Summary: Two Moldovan investors acquired all shares in two Kazakh companies that held extraction rights to oil and gas fields in Kazakhstan. Following Kazakhstan’s termination of extraction rights, the investors requested arbitration stating that Kazakhstan had breached the investor protection...