Skiljeklausuler i anställningsförhållanden
(2024) JURM02 20242Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- In Sweden, there is a long-standing history of arbitration agreements in contracts of employment. In principle, such agreements can be made both as part of an individual employment contract and by collective agreement. These agreements can be legally contested in two main ways. Firstly, arbitration agreements which although can be considered as included in the contractual relationship, for instance through references made in the contract of employment to collective agreements or similar documents, through the interpretation of the contract deemed as not constituting a legally binding part of the contractual relationship between two parties. Secondly, an arbitration agreement, as is the case for terms in contracts in general, can be deemed... (More)
- In Sweden, there is a long-standing history of arbitration agreements in contracts of employment. In principle, such agreements can be made both as part of an individual employment contract and by collective agreement. These agreements can be legally contested in two main ways. Firstly, arbitration agreements which although can be considered as included in the contractual relationship, for instance through references made in the contract of employment to collective agreements or similar documents, through the interpretation of the contract deemed as not constituting a legally binding part of the contractual relationship between two parties. Secondly, an arbitration agreement, as is the case for terms in contracts in general, can be deemed as unreasonable through the application of 36 § Contracts Act.
Arbitration agreements can in many cases be considered as burdensome for the employee. This considering the risk for that the employee may bear the costs for the arbitrators. Furthermore, the employee risks suffering a loss of rights as a result of not adhering to the rules on limitation periods of actions. On the other side of the scale the interests of the employer of arbitration proceedings consists of a swift judgement, and the non-disclosure of the awards.
In particular, this paper aims to determine the current law by analyzing the Labour Court’s decisions in cases pertaining to the questions at hand. The rules which are of central importance to the thesis has been designed in such a way as to leave a wide margin of discretion to the courts considering the absence of possibilities for resolving the conflicts associated with the rules with a high degree of generality. Considering this, a thorough examination and analysis of the courts’ decisions and reasoning has been conducted to establish the circumstances and interests considered by the Court in the assessments.
In summary, the thesis has highlighted multiple central considerations that the Labour Court has taken into account on several occasions. In general, it can be concluded that the Court has maintained its restrictive view on the application of 36 § Contracts Act which was early established practice. The thesis has, however, also shown that the interests of the employee has been given importance with certain distinctive requirements and views having been developed in the case law relating to arbitration agreements in contracts of employment. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Skiljeklausuler i anställningsförhållanden har i Sverige en lång historia. I princip kan ett avtal om skiljeförfarande träffas både som en del av ett enskilt anställningsavtal och genom kollektivavtal. Dessa klausuler kan avtalsrättsligt angripas på två tydliga sätt. För det första kan en skiljeklausul som visserligen kan anses utgöra del av avtalsförhållandet, genom exempelvis hänvisningar i anställningsavtalet till ett kollektivavtal eller annat liknande avtal, genom avtalstolkning bestämmas inte utgöra avtalsinnehåll i relationen mellan två parter. För det andra kan en skiljeklausul i ett anställningsavtal, likt vad gäller för avtalsvillkor i allmänhet, förklaras oskälig genom tillämpning av 36 § AvtL.
Skiljeklausuler i... (More) - Skiljeklausuler i anställningsförhållanden har i Sverige en lång historia. I princip kan ett avtal om skiljeförfarande träffas både som en del av ett enskilt anställningsavtal och genom kollektivavtal. Dessa klausuler kan avtalsrättsligt angripas på två tydliga sätt. För det första kan en skiljeklausul som visserligen kan anses utgöra del av avtalsförhållandet, genom exempelvis hänvisningar i anställningsavtalet till ett kollektivavtal eller annat liknande avtal, genom avtalstolkning bestämmas inte utgöra avtalsinnehåll i relationen mellan två parter. För det andra kan en skiljeklausul i ett anställningsavtal, likt vad gäller för avtalsvillkor i allmänhet, förklaras oskälig genom tillämpning av 36 § AvtL.
Skiljeklausuler i anställningsavtal kan för den enskilde arbetstagaren i många situationer vara att anse som betungande. Det uppkommer en risk för den en-skilde arbetstagaren att behöva stå för kostnaderna för skiljemännen efter en skiljedom meddelats. Dessutom riskerar den enskilde arbetstagaren att lida rättsförlust till följd av att regler om preskription inte följs. På andra sidan av vågskålen finns beaktansvärda skäl för arbetsgivaren av att eventuella tvister ska lösas inför skiljenämnd i stället för allmän domstol. Dels utgör skiljeförfarandet ett förhållandevis snabbt förfarande, dels blir avgörandena inte offentliga.
Uppsatsen syftar till att fastställa gällande rätt genom att framför allt undersöka arbetsdomstolens avgöranden som meddelats kopplat till dessa frågor. De regler som står centralt i uppsatsen har tillkommit och utformats på ett sätt att de lämnar stort utrymme för domstolens skön för att det saknas förutsättningar att lösa de till reglerna hörande konflikterna med en hög grad av allmängiltighet. Av dessa anledningar har en genomgående studie och analys av arbetsdomstolens överväganden genomförts för att utröna vilka omständigheter och bedömningsgrunder som domstolen tagit hänsyn till i sina bedömningar.
Sammantaget har studien belyst flera centrala bedömningsgrunder som arbetsdomstolen beaktat vid upprepade tillfällen. I allmänhet kan sägas att domstolen vidhållit den restriktiva synen på tillämpningen av 36 § AvtL som tidigt introducerades i praxis. Studien har dock visat att arbetstagarens intressen även tillmätts betydelse och att särpräglade krav och synsätt utvecklats i arbetsdomstolens praxis avseende skiljeklausuler i anställningsförhållanden. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9179931
- author
- Eriksson, David LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Arbitration agreements in contracts of employment
- course
- JURM02 20242
- year
- 2024
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- arbetsrätt, avtalsrätt, skiljeklausul, anställningsavtal
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9179931
- date added to LUP
- 2025-01-21 14:56:18
- date last changed
- 2025-01-21 14:56:18
@misc{9179931,
abstract = {{In Sweden, there is a long-standing history of arbitration agreements in contracts of employment. In principle, such agreements can be made both as part of an individual employment contract and by collective agreement. These agreements can be legally contested in two main ways. Firstly, arbitration agreements which although can be considered as included in the contractual relationship, for instance through references made in the contract of employment to collective agreements or similar documents, through the interpretation of the contract deemed as not constituting a legally binding part of the contractual relationship between two parties. Secondly, an arbitration agreement, as is the case for terms in contracts in general, can be deemed as unreasonable through the application of 36 § Contracts Act.
Arbitration agreements can in many cases be considered as burdensome for the employee. This considering the risk for that the employee may bear the costs for the arbitrators. Furthermore, the employee risks suffering a loss of rights as a result of not adhering to the rules on limitation periods of actions. On the other side of the scale the interests of the employer of arbitration proceedings consists of a swift judgement, and the non-disclosure of the awards.
In particular, this paper aims to determine the current law by analyzing the Labour Court’s decisions in cases pertaining to the questions at hand. The rules which are of central importance to the thesis has been designed in such a way as to leave a wide margin of discretion to the courts considering the absence of possibilities for resolving the conflicts associated with the rules with a high degree of generality. Considering this, a thorough examination and analysis of the courts’ decisions and reasoning has been conducted to establish the circumstances and interests considered by the Court in the assessments.
In summary, the thesis has highlighted multiple central considerations that the Labour Court has taken into account on several occasions. In general, it can be concluded that the Court has maintained its restrictive view on the application of 36 § Contracts Act which was early established practice. The thesis has, however, also shown that the interests of the employee has been given importance with certain distinctive requirements and views having been developed in the case law relating to arbitration agreements in contracts of employment.}},
author = {{Eriksson, David}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Skiljeklausuler i anställningsförhållanden}},
year = {{2024}},
}