Expertise that drives success in court and arbitration

Our lawyers have successfully represented clients in some of Sweden's largest and most complex trials. We offer experienced, strategic litigators who always put the client's business first.

Staying ahead of a resourceful counterparty requires skillful analysis and a determined approach. Our lawyers identify the critical issues early on and manage the process effectively at every stage - from initial risk assessments and negotiations to court or arbitration proceedings.

We resolve conflicts - strategically and commercially

Disputes in business often involve significant financial value, but also affect brands and important business relationships. The difference between a good and a bad outcome can be crucial for the business.

We always work for the solution that best benefits the client's business. In many cases, this means negotiating sustainable and creative agreements before the conflict escalates. When process is the best way forward, we offer a seasoned and combative litigation team with a proven track record of success.

Arbitration is one of the most common forms of commercial dispute resolution today. Our lawyers are particularly experienced in arbitration under the SCC rules and other international and national rules. We handle both Swedish and cross-border disputes.

A dispute arises when one person has a claim for some kind of benefit against another, and the other person objects to the claim. A dispute can also arise when two parties disagree about something, such as who is the rightful owner of a property.

The dispute ends when the claim or disagreement ceases. This can happen for several reasons: the court settles the dispute, the parties reach an agreement, one party withdraws, or the claim disappears or becomes worthless for some other reason, for example because it is time-barred.

Many disputes arise because of unclear contracts. However, this does not mean that the answer is always to have rigid contracts with detailed rules. Economic research has shown that relationship-based, more flexible contracts, which aim to maintain loyalty between the parties, can be more effective than contracts more focused on control.

If a dispute is brewing, it is important to protect your rights, for example by securing evidence, making proper complaints and being careful about how you express yourself in emails. Of course, it is also important to communicate with your contractual partner to avoid misunderstandings and, if possible, negotiate a solution.

When you judge yourself to be benefiting from it, the answer is simple. It is, of course, a trivial answer. The hard part is making that assessment. Here are some of the things to consider.

- The likelihood of winning. That is the legal question. It is the lawyer's job to answer it.
- The subject matter of the dispute. The greater the value at stake, the more important the dispute becomes.
- Ability to pay. The parties' finances are important. Of course, it does not help that a judgment says that you are entitled to payment if the other party has no money.
- Emotions. Some people shy away from conflict. Others are combative and may pursue a dispute on principle. People often underestimate how resource-intensive a dispute is, even for larger companies. This is particularly noticeable when it has been going on for some time.
- Time. A dispute in arbitration can be settled in a year. In court, it can take several years. The time it takes to resolve a dispute is often underestimated.
- Relationships. A good settlement can save a business relationship. But it doesn't have to be that way. Sometimes trust is already broken. And it can be worth curbing disloyal behavior.
- Reputation. The impact on your reputation depends on who you are, what the dispute is, and also how the dispute is settled: disputes in court are public, arbitration is usually confidential.
During the course of the dispute, these things will change. New evidence may emerge that improves or worsens the legal position. The other party may go bankrupt and have to surrender. The trial may have to be repeated, making it more expensive and longer. You must therefore be prepared to reconsider your assessment.

Arbitration is the private administration of justice. For a dispute to be settled by arbitration, the parties must first agree to it. Arbitration works much like a trial in court. But there are a few things that differ.

- Speed. Arbitration is quicker. This is partly because the judge, or judges, have to give a ruling faster, and partly because the ruling cannot be appealed. However, there is a safety valve: if the award contains a serious error, it can be set aside by a court.

- Flexibility: in arbitration, the rules are more flexible. For example, the parties can choose the judge, the length of the proceedings and the number of documents to be submitted.

- Confidentiality. Arbitration proceedings are usually confidential. This means that the media and outsiders cannot ask to be present during the proceedings or read the judgment.

- Cost. Arbitration can be more expensive than court proceedings. This is because the parties must also pay for the judge. As in court, the main rule is that the loser pays all costs.

It is common to have Swedish arbitration proceedings decided according to the rules of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC). In this case, the SCC administers the arbitration.

Normally, the Swedish court will decide the dispute in these cases.
- When the defendant is domiciled in Sweden.
- When the parties have agreed that the Swedish court will decide the dispute.
- When the Swedish court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear the dispute.

For example, according to international rules, a dispute about a property must be heard in the country where the property is located. - When the dispute otherwise has a special connection to Sweden.

Almost always, when a Swedish court decides the dispute, the dispute must also be decided under Swedish law. But this does not have to be the case. If the defendant is domiciled in Sweden, but the dispute is most closely connected to another country, the law of that country should be applied. In a legal case between the mining company Boliden and Chilean individuals, Skellefteå District Court applied Chilean law.

The parties can agree to resolve the dispute through arbitration in Sweden. They can also agree on which country's law will apply.

Disputes are settled by the general courts, i.e. the District Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. Some disputes are settled by specialized courts. For example, the Land and Environment Court settles disputes about environmental damage.

Administrative courts - the Administrative Court, the Administrative Court of Appeal and the Supreme Administrative Court - do not settle disputes.

In which court does the trial start? The district court of the defendant. If the defendant is a company, the proceedings start at the district court in the place where the company's board of directors is based. If the defendant is a private individual, it is the district court where the person is registered. There are exceptions. One exception is if the dispute concerns the right to premises. In that case, the trial starts in the district court of the place where the property is located.

The parties can also agree on the district court where the trial will start.

In most cases: when you have a right to be enforced. The court grants the right, the bailiff enforces it. A person who has a judgment for payment can therefore turn to the bailiff, who will seize the debtor's property, sell it and pay the creditor with the money.

The bailiff can also return property to its owner, evict someone or open a locked room.

When a judgment is issued, the winner usually sends it to the bailiff. This allows the bailiff to enforce the judgment if the loser doesn't comply voluntarily.

The applicant is the plaintiff. The other party is the defendant. The first two documents in a lawsuit are normally the plaintiff's statement of claim and the defendant's statement of defense.

A writ of summons should contain information on
- who the parties and their representatives are
- what you are claiming,
- why you are claiming what you are claiming
- what evidence is relied on and
- what gives the court jurisdiction to hear the dispute

A statement of defence must contain information on
- who the parties and representatives are
- your position on the claim - whether you agree or disagree with it
- if you are contesting the claim - why you are doing so and
- what evidence you are relying on.

Arbitration is initiated in much the same way as a trial in court.

Sometimes it is urgent, for example if the person you are claiming money from is in the process of getting rid of it. In that case, a future judgment risks becoming worthless.

If this is about to happen, you can apply to the court for attachment. Attachment means to temporarily seize money or other property. It can be described as the money being detained.

In order for the court to agree, the applicant must show both that she has a claim and that there is a so-called risk of sabotage - for example, that the other party is about to get rid of the money.

The court can also order interim measures other than attachment.

In most cases, the other party is asked to pay a certain amount of money. However, it is also possible to demand another service. This could be, for example, the delivery of property or moving out of premises. An odd claim in an older case was that the other party, an author, should finish a chapter of a book within a certain time. The court granted the claim.

If the claim is granted, the court gives judgment according to the claim. The Enforcement Authority can then enforce the judgment.

There are also claims that do not involve any performance at all. For example, you can ask the court to establish that you have the copyright to a certain work. Such claims cannot be enforced because there is no performance to enforce.

In many cases, you have to act within a certain time or your claim will be lost.

For example. If you want to bring a claim against the CEO of a company, you often have to do so within one year of the annual report being presented to the general meeting.

Another example. If you have bought a vehicle or other movable property and discover a defect, you should immediately report the defect to the seller. Otherwise, you may not be able to rely on the defect in court.

It is also common for the parties to agree that if you have, for example, a claim for a penalty payment, you must make it within a certain time in order for the claim to be valid.

In addition to this, there is also a general, outer time limit: prescription.

A claim normally expires 10 years after it was incurred. Claims against consumers are time-barred after three years. However, until the limitation period expires, the limitation period can be restarted at any time by reminding the debtor to pay.

To avoid missing a deadline, it is important to know the rules of the area of law involved in the dispute.

First of all, the application for a summons must be served on the defendant, i.e. the application must be served on the defendant in the manner prescribed by law. Sometimes the defendant does not sign the notification documents sent by the court. In this case, service is delayed and so is the trial. But in the end, the defendant can usually be served in one way or another.

If a defendant then refuses to file a defense, the court can issue a so-called default judgment. This means that the court accepts the plaintiff's claims without review.

The court can also make a default judgment against someone who does not show up for an oral hearing or other court session.

In arbitration, it is more difficult to delay the process.

At the main hearing, the parties present their story, evidence and arguments to the court.

- The hearing begins with the President checking who is present,

- then the plaintiff presents its claims and the defendant presents its position on the claims.

- Then the parties - first the plaintiff, then the defendant - explain what the dispute is about and present their evidence.

- Then the parties and witnesses are questioned.

- Finally, the parties may plead, i.e. present their arguments as to why the court should rule as they wish.

After the hearing, the court deliberates and gives its judgment. The judgment is usually given a month or so after the main hearing. The judgment is emailed to the parties' representatives.

In arbitration, the hearing proceeds in much the same way. But there the rules are more flexible.

Normally, during a dispute, the parties meet twice in the district court. The first time is at a so-called oral preparation. The second time is at the main hearing.

The purpose of an oral hearing is to clarify what the dispute is about and what the parties' views are. Often there are some issues that are unclear.

At the oral preparation, the judge and the parties usually also plan the next steps, such as the day of the main hearing and whether there will be one or three judges.

At the end of the hearing, the judge usually asks the parties how they feel about a settlement. If the parties agree, the judge will conduct negotiations between the parties for the rest of the oral proceedings.

Part of the legal costs are covered by business insurance. Legal expenses cover is the part of the insurance that covers legal costs.

Legal expenses cover normally includes a deductible and a cap on compensation. The maximum compensation that can be paid for a dispute is often five or ten price base amounts.

The lawyer handles the contact with the insurance companies. It is the lawyer who contacts the insurance company and applies for legal protection.

Before the insurance companies pay out the compensation, they normally carry out their own assessment of whether the costs were reasonable and necessary.

The detailed conditions for legal expenses cover are set out in your policy conditions.

In criminal cases, the prosecution always has the burden of proof, but in civil cases it is often unclear. Many civil cases are decided by who has the burden of proof. If there is no evidence, the person with the burden of proof loses, even if she has the law on her side.

A simple rule of thumb - not always, but often - is that the person claiming something must prove it.

An example. Anders Bygg AB claims that Berits Bod AB should pay SEK 500,000 because they agreed that Anders would paint Berit's roof for this price, and now Anders has done so. If Berit objects that they have no agreement at all and Anders has not painted his house at all, Anders has the burden of proof for his claim. If, on the other hand, Berit agrees to what Anders said, but objects that she doesn't have to pay because Anders painted the house the wrong color and in poor quality paint, then it is Berit who has the burden of proof for her claim.

The idea is for the parties to submit their evidence as early as possible, preferably in the application and the defense.

However, in almost all cases, the parties add to their evidence as they go along. But this cannot be done indefinitely. The court may decide that after a certain date, no more evidence can be submitted unless there is a valid excuse or the new evidence will not delay the case. And if a party brings new evidence during the main hearing - when the case is decided - the district court can reject the evidence if the court considers that it was grossly negligent not to have submitted it earlier.

In the Court of Appeal, the main rule is that no new evidence is allowed.

It is not unusual for there to be evidence in favor of one party, but that evidence is with the other party. Can you then force the other party to disclose the evidence?

The answer is typically yes. If someone is in possession of a written document that is likely to be relevant as evidence in a case, that document must be produced.

The longevity of a dispute depends on the size and complexity of the dispute and the load on the court. At the time of writing, several members of the judiciary have recently raised the alarm about how large criminal cases overload courts.

A trial in the district court, in a major commercial dispute, can be expected to last between one and two years after the application for a summons.

The judgment of the district court can of course be appealed. If the Court of Appeal decides to hear the case - leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal is required - it may take another one to two years.

The Court of Appeal's judgment can also be appealed. But it is rare for the Supreme Court to take up cases. Once the Supreme Court has refused to hear the dispute, it is finally settled, unless of course the Supreme Court takes up the case.

Arbitration proceedings are faster. If the procedure follows the rules of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce (SCC) - the parties decide - the judge should have issued an arbitral award within about six months.

It is also possible to opt for a simplified procedure. In this case, the ruling will be issued within approximately three months. This ruling cannot be appealed.

The cost of a dispute depends on the amount of money involved, the complexity of the dispute and the amount of evidence required.

Legal costs in the district court alone are rarely less than half a million SEK per party. The largest disputes can cost several million SEK per party. If the case ends up in the Court of Appeal, the costs increase. However, they are not as high there as in the district court.

Litigation costs consist mainly of these items: - Legal fees. This is the largest item.

- Expenses. You often need to pay for an expert, for example to investigate something

technical issue. The expert usually investigates, writes a report and testifies in court.

- Own work. If a company is in dispute, employees need to spend time on meetings, gathering evidence, etc. This is also a legal cost, but it is small compared to the others.

In arbitration, you have all these costs plus the costs of the judge and possibly also the administrative costs of the arbitration.

The main rule is that the losing party pays the winner's legal costs, but only to the extent that the court considers the costs to be reasonable. If no party wins the case, the general rule is that each party bears its own costs.

An insurance company may pay part of your legal costs.

Part of the legal costs are covered by business insurance. Legal expenses cover is the part of the insurance that covers legal costs. Part of the legal costs are covered by the business insurance. Legal expenses cover is the part of the insurance that covers legal costs.

Legal expenses cover normally includes a deductible and a cap on compensation. The maximum compensation that can be paid for a dispute is often five or ten price base amounts.

The lawyer handles the contact with the insurance companies. It is the lawyer who contacts the insurance company and applies for legal protection.

Before the insurance companies pay out the compensation, they normally carry out their own assessment of whether the costs were reasonable and necessary.

The detailed conditions for legal expenses cover are set out in the terms and conditions of your insurance policy. Legal expenses cover normally includes a deductible and a cap on compensation. The maximum compensation that can be paid for a dispute is often five or ten price base amounts.

The lawyer handles the contact with the insurance companies. It is the lawyer who contacts the insurance company and applies for legal protection.

Before the insurance companies pay out the compensation, they normally carry out their own assessment of whether the costs were reasonable and necessary.

The detailed conditions for legal expenses cover are set out in your policy conditions.

A dispute can end in several ways.

It can end with one party winning the case completely, but also partially, for example if one party claimed SEK 50 million in damages but the court awarded SEK 30 million. It can also end with neither party winning more than the other.

It can also end with the parties settling, i.e. reaching an agreement before the main hearing in court.

The loser normally has to pay the winner's legal costs. If a party loses a larger part of the case, it will normally pay a larger part of the winner's costs. If no party has won more than the other, no one will normally have to pay anyone's costs.

An appeal against a judgment can be lodged within three weeks of its delivery. In order for the Court of Appeal to review a judgment, the Court of Appeal must first grant leave to appeal. Leave to appeal is also required in the Supreme Court. Such permission is rarely granted.

Most judgments require one of the parties to pay the other. The question then is when payment should be made: immediately or after the judgment has been appealed and reviewed by a higher court? The Court of Appeal can overturn the judgment.

The answer is that a debt under a judgment falls due immediately, even if the loser appeals. Once the winner has received the judgment, she can apply to the enforcement authority to have it enforced.

The Enforcement Authority can then measure the property to secure payment under the judgment. However, the enforcement authority will not pay money to the winner until the judgment has become final, i.e. it can no longer be appealed.

A defendant can avoid enforcement by the Enforcement Authority by providing security for his or her debt under the judgment.

An appeal against a judgment can be lodged within three weeks of it being issued. In order for the Court of Appeal to review a judgment, the Court of Appeal must first grant leave to appeal. An arbitral award, i.e. a judgment from an arbitration procedure, cannot be appealed.

Studies show that most disputes are resolved through conciliation, i.e. a voluntary agreement. A settlement means that the parties agree on how to resolve the dispute instead of letting the court decide.

The parties then inform the court that they have reached an agreement. Normally, the parties end the litigation either by the plaintiff withdrawing his or her claim or by having the court give a judgment with the content agreed by the parties.

A common wording in settlement agreements is that all dealings in the dispute are now closed. This way, no one can revive the dispute. The great advantage of settlement is, of course, that it gives you control over the end of the dispute.