SWEDEN Law and Practice Contributed by: Georgios Eleftheriadis, Hellström Law Firm
one claimant brings actions against multiple separate respondents or where multiple claimants bring actions against one or several respondents, assuming again that the claims materially have the same basis. Finally, Section 4 of Chapter 14 of the Code of Judicial Procedure mandates a joinder of cases where some- one who was not party to the proceedings wishes to bring an action against either or both parties in an ongoing proceeding concerning the matter in dispute. Discretionary Joinder Besides mandatory joinder, the Code of Judicial Pro- cedure also includes the option for discretionary join- der. This follows from Chapter 14, Section 6 the Code of Judicial Procedure – under which, procedures may be joined even in situations other than mandatory join- der, if this would benefit the investigation of the case. The determination of whether such joinder should take place (ie, if there are any investigatory or other benefits to joining the cases) is entirely at the court’s discretion. A general requirement for both mandatory joinder and discretionary joinder is furthermore that the proce- dures take place in the same court and that they are subject to the same procedural rules. Joinder Under the Group Proceedings Act In addition to the rules under the Code of Judicial Procedure, Section 18 of the Group Proceedings Act states that the court may allow the claimant to expand upon the class action either by including additional claims from the current class members or by includ- ing new members in the group. This must be done without significantly delaying the case and without otherwise subjecting the respondent to considerable inconvenience. 3.6 Case Management Powers of Courts Swedish procedural law provides the courts with rea- sonably wide management powers. Courts may at their discretion order preliminary hearings (including more than one – although this is rare), order clarifi- cations from the parties, determine when to set the deadline for the submission of additional evidence, and so on. Swedish courts are also free to suggest a settlement between the parties and lead such settle-
ment discussions; however, there is no obligation on either party to participate. Moreover, courts determine the length each party has to prepare its submissions. If a party fails to comply with the court’s orders, the court may also decide that the party may no longer submit new circumstances or new evidence past a date determined by the court (Chapter 42, Section 15 of the Code of Judicial Pro- cedure). There is currently an ongoing legislative review to assess whether the courts should also be enabled – to a greater extent than is currently possible ‒ to render default judgments against parties who fail to follow the court’s orders (as of now, default judgments may be rendered if the respondent does not provide an initial response or if a party does not show up to a hearing). However, the result of said review remains to be seen. 3.7 Length and Timetable for Proceedings The bulk of a Swedish civil proceeding (of which class actions are a form) is conducted in written form, with submissions exchanged between the parties usually within a few weeks of each submitting ‒ although this may be longer depending on the complexity and size of the case. Normally, there are only two occasions on which the parties appear before the court ‒ namely, at: • the preliminary hearing, which usually takes place shortly after the first exchange of submissions between both parties; and • the main hearing (which, depending on complexity, may last for days or weeks). With regard to the preliminary hearing, please see 3.2 Overview of Procedure . The trying of the case on its merits occurs during the main hearing. Swedish civil trial procedure follows two basic principles: the principle of immediacy and the principle of oral proceedings. The former princi- ple dictates that the court may only try the case on those facts and evidence that were presented dur- ing the main hearing (irrespective of whether they are included in previously submitted written submissions ‒ although references during the hearing to the written submissions are allowed), whereas the latter principle
294 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook