SWEDEN Law and Practice Contributed by: Björn Tude, Daniel Waerme, Caroline Gulliksson Dock and Sandra Aljassani, Gernandt & Danielsson
6.2 Role of Courts Swedish law provides a dual system whereby both arbitral tribunals and Swedish courts may grant inter - im measures. The existence of an arbitration agree - ment does not preclude a party from applying to court for interim measures (Section 4 (3) of the SAA). Swedish courts may order interim measures regard - less of whether the arbitration is seated in Sweden or abroad. Such authority may be exercised before the initiation of arbitral proceedings, whilst the arbitration is ongoing, and even after an award has been ren - dered, provided enforcement is at issue. Unlike arbi - tral tribunals, Swedish courts can issue enforceable interim orders, including on an ex parte basis, and may grant any relief that would otherwise be avail - able in ordinary civil litigation, such as freezing orders, attachments, or preservation of evidence. The SAA contains no provision for the appointment of an emergency arbitrator. A party in need of urgent relief must instead turn to the Swedish courts, which may grant interim measures under Chapter 15 of the Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure. However, the SCC Rules (as most other institutional rules) permit parties to apply for the appointment of an emergency arbitrator to decide requests for urgent interim meas - ures prior to the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. Emergency arbitrator decisions are binding upon the parties, though their enforceability in practice depends upon the national courts, as neither the New York Convention, the UNCITRAL Model Law, nor the SAA expressly regulates enforcement. Swedish courts cannot take action in arbitration mat - ters on their own initiative: they require a party to formally request their involvement. When courts do become involved, their role is restricted to handling specific procedural matters that are explicitly outlined in the SAA, such as the appointment and removal of arbitrators in particular circumstances, and granting of interim relief. 6.3 Security for Costs An arbitral tribunal may request the parties to provide advance security for its own fees and expenses (Sec - tion 37 (2) of the SAA). Beyond this, Swedish law does
not provide for arbitral tribunals or courts to order security for costs. The SCC Rules provide an exception. Under excep - tional circumstances, an arbitral tribunal may order a claimant or counterclaimant to furnish security for the other party’s costs, though such measures are rare in practice. Swedish courts may also require a claimant domiciled outside the EU or EEA to provide security for litigation costs. However, Swedish courts apply this provision restrictively, and such orders are rarely granted. Arbitral procedure in Sweden is governed by the SAA, which applies to both domestic and international arbi - trations seated in Sweden. The SAA is founded upon party autonomy and imposes only limited mandatory requirements: • parties must be treated equally and afforded a rea - sonable opportunity to present their case (Section 21 of the SAA); and • a hearing on the merits must be held if requested by a party, unless the parties have agreed other - wise (Section 24 of the SAA). Beyond these due process guarantees, the tribunal possesses broad discretion to organise the proceed - ings in consultation with the parties, with the SAA’s provisions serving as default rules where the parties have not agreed otherwise. Where parties opt for institutional arbitration, the applicable rules supplement the SAA. The SCC Rules contain detailed provisions on case management and efficiency, including: 7. Procedure 7.1 Governing Rules • a general duty for the parties, tribunal and SCC to conduct proceedings expeditiously (Article 2); and • a default six-month time limit for rendering the final award, subject to extension by the SCC Board (Articles 42–43).
966 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook