Judgment of the Svea Court of Appeal, 13 February 2015, Case No. T 4037-13
Summary: The claimants requested that the Court annul certain items of the arbitral award because the arbitral tribunal had exceeded its mandate, alternatively that a procedural error occurred which likely affected the outcome of the case. The claimants argued that the arbitrator had based its decision on circumstances not referenced by the parties, or rejected circumstances which should be deemed to have been accepted by the parties. In the arbitration, one of the claimants had sought damages for the respondent’s breach of a contract with another claimant. The issue for the tribunal was thus whether the claimant was entitled to damages under the contract to which it was not a party. The breach itself, which the respondent had neither admitted nor denied, was not an issue in the arbitration. In challenging the award, the claimant argued that the arbitral tribunal had exceeded its mandate by considering and deciding the issue of the breach itself – a circumstance the parties had not referenced, and should therefore be deemed to have accepted. The Court rejected the claimants’ case, explaining that it was evident from the award that the tribunal had merely referenced the breach in framing the respondent’s case, it had not affirmatively decided whether the alleged breach had actually occurred. Thus, the Court decided that the arbitrator did not exceed his mandate and no procedural error occurred.