您现在的位置:一裁网>> 仲裁数据库>> 司法案例>> 国外法院>> 瑞典 >> 详细资料
Elf Neftegaz S.A.vs Interneft,Interneft
点击数:
【文书性质】判决
【文书编号】 Ö 1429-15
【发布机构】 Supreme Court of Sweden
【案件类型】 仲裁管辖权争议
【发布日期】 2016年04月21日
【裁判人员】
【代理律师】
【当 事 人】 Elf Neftegaz S.A.,Interneft,Interneft
【国 别】 瑞典
【主 题】 仲裁管辖权争议
【案件摘要】 A party in an ongoing arbitration initiated court proceedings under section 2 of the Swedish Arbitration Act, which provides that public courts may, on motion of a party, review an arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction while the arbitration remains open.
【全文】         

Judgment of the Supreme Court, 21 April 2016, Case No. Ö 1429-15

Judgment of the Supreme Court, 21 April 2016, Case No. Ö 1429-15, English

 

Judgment of the Supreme Court, 21 April 2016, Case No. Ö 1429-15, Swedish

 

Date of decision

Court

The Supreme Court

Case No.

Ö 1429-15

Subject Matter

Section 2 of the Swedish Arbitration Act

Summary

A party in an ongoing arbitration initiated court proceedings under section 2 of the Swedish Arbitration Act, which provides that public courts may, on motion of a party, review an arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction while the arbitration remains open. Here, the party moved the court to affirm that (i) the parties were not bound by an arbitration agreement, and (ii) even if the parties were bound by an arbitration agreement, the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to resolve the dispute. The counterparty moved to dismiss ground (ii), arguing that this ground went was beyond the limits of the court’s mandate under Section 2. The Court of Appeal agreed, stating that the court’s review of the arbitral tribunal’s jurisdiction is limited to the existence of a valid and applicable arbitration agreement. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal, holding that Section 2 should be interpreted so that the scope of the court’s jurisdictional review is commensurate with that of the arbitral tribunal. In other words, the court’s mandate to review a tribunal’s jurisdiction in an ongoing arbitration covers all jurisdictional issues, and is not limited to the issue of whether the parties are bound by an arbitration agreement.