Decision by the Svea Court of Appeal, 27 November 2019, Case N:o T 10191-17
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 rendered: a separate award and a final award concerning the supply agreement, and a final award concerning the transit agreement. All three awards were challenged.
The present judgment of the Court of Appeal concerns the separate award rendered under the supply agreement. Final hearings in the two other cases (T 2826-18 and T 3250-18) are planned to take place during 2020.
The dispute under the supply agreement concerned i.e. claims for payment and claims for invalidity or replacement of certain contractual clauses. The Claimant was unsuccessful in the arbitration proceedings and challenged the separate and final awards on several grounds. The Claimant claimed that the tribunal had committed several procedural errors, and that the arbitral tribunal had exceeded its mandate in its assessment of the parties’ requests as regards the annual contract volume of natural gas. The Claimant argued that that the tribunal had went beyond the scope of the proceeding, that the tribunal failed to provide substantive guidance of the proceeding, and finally that the tribunal had failed to provide complete grounds when rendering the award.
In its assessment of the separate award at issue, the Svea Court of Appeal concluded that it had not been established that any excess of mandate or procedural error had occurred during the arbitration, and therefore rejected the Claimant’s challenge in its entirety.