Advanced

Internationellt privat- och processrättsliga frågor rörande den svenska kollektiva arbetsrätten

Sinander, Erik (2010) JURM01 20101
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Uppsatsen behandlar svenska internationella privat- och processrättsliga (IP-rätt) frågor rörande den svenska kollektiva arbetsrätten, varmed förstås den relation mellan arbetsgivare och fackförening samt de tvister som därur kan uppstå. Huvudfrågorna är de som traditionellt anses utgöra den IP-rättsliga problematiken, vilka utgörs av jurisdiktionsfrågan, lagvalsfrågan och verkställighetsfrågan.
Jurisdiktionsfrågan regleras av Bryssel I-förordningen i de fall då svaranden har sitt hemvist inom EU och huvudregeln för dessa fall är att svaranden inte skall behöva svara i andra domstolar än sitt hemlands. Här finns en mängd viktiga undantag, ett av de viktigaste utgörs av möjligheten att avtala om behörig domstol. Vidare så finns det regler... (More)
Uppsatsen behandlar svenska internationella privat- och processrättsliga (IP-rätt) frågor rörande den svenska kollektiva arbetsrätten, varmed förstås den relation mellan arbetsgivare och fackförening samt de tvister som därur kan uppstå. Huvudfrågorna är de som traditionellt anses utgöra den IP-rättsliga problematiken, vilka utgörs av jurisdiktionsfrågan, lagvalsfrågan och verkställighetsfrågan.
Jurisdiktionsfrågan regleras av Bryssel I-förordningen i de fall då svaranden har sitt hemvist inom EU och huvudregeln för dessa fall är att svaranden inte skall behöva svara i andra domstolar än sitt hemlands. Här finns en mängd viktiga undantag, ett av de viktigaste utgörs av möjligheten att avtala om behörig domstol. Vidare så finns det regler som säger att rätt forum för ett avtal är den ort där den, för tvisten, relevanta förpliktelsen har sin fullgörelseort (forum solutionis). För det fallet att det är en utomobligatorisk skadevållande handling så är rätt forum det i vilket skadan har uppstått eller kan uppstå (forum delictii). När ett moderbolag har en utländsk etablering så är det bolaget även skyldigt att svara i etableringsstaten. Finns det flera svaranden i en tvist så kan dessa alla komma att behöva svara i någon av de svarandes hemviststater.
Lagvalsfrågan regleras av de EU-rättsliga Rom I-, och Rom II-förordningarna om lagval för avtal respektive om lagval för utomkontraktuella situationer. De två instrumenten är universellt tillämpliga med vilket menas att den lag som pekas ut skall vara tillämplig, vilken av all världens lagar det än må vara. För avtal är den viktigaste huvudregeln att avtal om lagval accepteras (s.k. partsautonomi). Om ingen lag är avtalad så måste domstolen bestämma till vilket land tvisten har närmast anknytning. I uppsatsen redogörs för ett antal relevanta schablonregler. Den viktigaste av dessa på kollektivavtalsrättens område kan sägas vara den regel som säger att orten för den relevanta huvudförpliktelsen för käromålet skall vara forumort.
I uppsatsen redogörs för den problematik som kan förekomma i samband med tillämpning av de båda lagvalsinstrumenten. Exempelvis så kan länder förklara vissa nationella bestämmelser vara internationellt tvingande. På den svenska kollektiva arbetsrättens område har så gjorts för Medbestämmandelagens § 25 a. Bestämmelsen säger att även om ett annat lands lag är utpekat i ett fall som rör stridsåtgärders tillämplighet så skall svensk lag avgöra stridsåtgärdens lovlighet. Detta för med sig att en fackförening kan använda sig av en stridsåtgärd som egentligen skulle anses vara rättsstridigt tvång enligt den utpekade lagen i syfte att få ett kollektivavtal undertecknat. Om det införs en lagvalsklausul som utpekar svensk rätt i detta kollektivavtal så skall hela avtalet anses giltigt och legitimt i svensk rätt. Den främmande rättens definition av ett eventuellt rättsstridigt tvång underkänns till förmån för den svenska strejkrätten.
5
Utomobligatoriska förpliktelser, är som namnet antyder, förpliktelser som grundar sig på ansvar utanför avtal. Sådana förpliktelser på den kollektiva arbetsrättens område kan t.ex. grunda sig på skador till följd av vidtagna stridsåtgärder. För att avgöra vilken lag som skall reglera dessa fall måste man finna ett stridsåtgärdsstatut. Sådana fall skall först och främst bedömas enligt lagen i det land där skadan har lidits eller där skadan kan komma att lidas.
Verkställighetsfrågan berörs tämligen ytligt då den inte är speciell för den kollektiva arbetsrätten och det konstateras i uppsatsen att huvudregeln på området är att utländska domar inte verkställs. Det kan dock understrykas att det för skiljedomar gäller motsatt huvudregel. Utländska skiljedomar verkställs alltså vanligen.
I konklusionsdelen kan författaren sägas anföra en grundlinje som utgår från att alla parter skall kunna överblicka konsekvenserna av sitt handlande. Detta resulterar dels i det konkreta rådet till alla verksamma på området att införa prorogations- och lagvalsklausuler i kollketivavtal samt i ett de lege ferenda-resonemang där bl.a. vikten av de nationella autonoma domsrättsreglernas överensstämmande med Bryssel-/Luganoreglerna och ett mer förutsebart stridsåtgärdsforum förespråkas i fall med flera svarande parter. (Less)
Abstract
This thesis addresses a private international law perspective of questions and problems related to cross-border collective labour law disputes in Sweden. This means, in Swedish terminology1, that the researched issues are the questions of jurisdiction, choice of law and enforceability in disputes arising from the relation between an employer and a workers' union.
Collective labour law in Sweden is, to a great extent, governed by the organisations of the labour market. These are the workers' unions and the employer organisations. The independence from the state contributes to the importance of the collective agreements that the labour market organisations close with each other. The collective agreements determine minimum wage, working... (More)
This thesis addresses a private international law perspective of questions and problems related to cross-border collective labour law disputes in Sweden. This means, in Swedish terminology1, that the researched issues are the questions of jurisdiction, choice of law and enforceability in disputes arising from the relation between an employer and a workers' union.
Collective labour law in Sweden is, to a great extent, governed by the organisations of the labour market. These are the workers' unions and the employer organisations. The independence from the state contributes to the importance of the collective agreements that the labour market organisations close with each other. The collective agreements determine minimum wage, working hours and many other issues that in other jurisdictions might be sorted as public law. However, the Swedish juridical solution of collective agreements make them a part of Swedish civil law.
In the inter-European perspective, the Swedish membership of the European Union has to be looked intently at. The most important EU regulations are the fundamental principle of non-discrimination against other EU citizens and the idea of the four freedoms of movement. E.g. an idea of the union is that labour shall be able to work (and move) freely within the internal European market. Some Swedish regulations have been found as discriminating in the meaning of EU law and have therefore been forbidden to use against EU citizens. However these rules are still valid in the relations to non-citizens; e.g. a limited company that is situated outside the union. One of the most internationally known cases on this issue is the so called Laval case where the Swedish Lex Britannia principle of an extended right for workers' unions to execute strike actions against foreign employers was held to be discriminating in the sense of EU law.
The first international private law question, the question of jurisdiction is in the inter-European relations governed by the Brussels I Regulation (for EU member states) and the Lugano Convention for the EFTA countries with an exemption for Lichtenstein (i.e.: Norway, Iceland and Switzerland).2 The Brussels Regime states that a juridical or natural person domiciled in the EU may, as a main rule, only be sued in her domestic state.
There are a few important exceptions that state when a defendant may have to appear in the court of another member state. The most important exception is the possibility for the parties to agree on the place of the court (forum choice). This can e.g. be done through a prorogation clause in a collective agreement, but also through an agreement when the dispute already is arisen. Further, the separation of contractual and non-contractual damages is important for the question of jurisdiction. When a forum state is not agreed in the collective agreement through a prorogation clause, the court has to follow the rules within the Brussels Regime. When the dispute deals with a contract, the court first has to try to decide the forum solutionis, which is the state where the main obligation is performed. The main obligation for a collective agreement is hard to define due to its nature of sometimes being treated as semi law. The author of this thesis concludes that the main obligation either might be to provide labour and to work or just to follow the contract (pacta sunt servanda). For a tort or delict case on collective labour law the most accurate exemption is that a defendant has to appear in the state where the damage has been done or might be done. When a company has an establishment abroad they also will be obligated to appear in the courts of that state in cases related to the establishment. When a third party interferes a dispute between two parties the case can be dealt with by the courts of the interfering party. Furthermore, there are a number of exceptions for weaker party contracts where the weaker party has a more beneficial right to sue the stronger part than in the normal case. An employee qualifies as a weaker party but a workers' union does not, why the matter is not further dealt with in the essay.
The choice of law question is regulated by the Rome I and the Rome II regulations on choice of law on contractual, respectively non-contractual obligations. The regulations are enacted in order to harmonize the choice of law by the member states of the EU and they have universal applicability, i.e. whichever law that may be pointed out by the regulations will be applicable for the court. There are though national limitations to how far the foreign law will be interpreted. In the case where the issue relates to contractual obligations the governing law will be the law that is chosen by the parties or, when no law has been chosen, the law that most closely relates to the relevant contractual obligation.
An interesting phenomenon within the harmonizing instrument of the Rome Convention is the opportunity to declare national rules as internationally imperative. The 25 a § of the central Swedish code on collective labour law (Medbestämmandelagen) has been declared as imperative. The rule is special in the sense that it states that even though a foreign law has been pointed out for the interpretation of a collective agreement, the legality of a strike action shall be decided by Swedish law. This may result in precarious situations where a collective agreement that would have been dismissed because it is regarded as enforced by duress in accordance with the governing law that is pointed out by the Rome I Regulation. However, the outcome in Sweden will be contrary because the strike action is allowed in accordance to Swedish law and the choice of law clause that states that the entire collective agreement will be governed by Swedish law will also be valid.
3
The question of enforceability addresses the issue of how a foreign verdict can be enforced through Swedish authorities. Normally, a foreign verdict will not be enforced in Sweden. However, there is an important exception for verdicts governed by the Brussels Regime. It shall be stressed that the opposite presumption governs arbitrational verdicts. Arbitrational verdicts will, in other words, be enforced internationally.
A conclusive chapter (chapter 5) discusses some of the mere interesting problems in the opinion of the author. A comprehensive inference is that the EU regulations that aim to harmonize the inter-European market are toothless due to the use of national interpretations and imperative national legislation.
The practical advice given to practicing lawyers, employers and workers' unions is to use the possibilities of enclosing the collective agreements with prorogation clauses and choice of law clauses in order to minimize the risk of unforeseen consequences. As a de lege ferenda argumentation the author wants to see a greater uniformity of the Brussels Regulation and the Swedish national independent laws on jurisdiction in order to secure a better foreseeability. Further it is argued that the EU harmonization differs dangerously from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and that this carries the risk to see a mirage of harmonization in the EU. An over-grasping opinion of the thesis can be summarized in the fundamental opinion that the parties should be able to predict the consequences of their actions. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Sinander, Erik
supervisor
organization
course
JURM01 20101
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Arbetsrätt, Internationell privaträtt
language
Swedish
id
1713880
date added to LUP
2010-11-05 13:41:48
date last changed
2010-11-05 13:41:48
@misc{1713880,
  abstract     = {This thesis addresses a private international law perspective of questions and problems related to cross-border collective labour law disputes in Sweden. This means, in Swedish terminology1, that the researched issues are the questions of jurisdiction, choice of law and enforceability in disputes arising from the relation between an employer and a workers' union.
Collective labour law in Sweden is, to a great extent, governed by the organisations of the labour market. These are the workers' unions and the employer organisations. The independence from the state contributes to the importance of the collective agreements that the labour market organisations close with each other. The collective agreements determine minimum wage, working hours and many other issues that in other jurisdictions might be sorted as public law. However, the Swedish juridical solution of collective agreements make them a part of Swedish civil law.
In the inter-European perspective, the Swedish membership of the European Union has to be looked intently at. The most important EU regulations are the fundamental principle of non-discrimination against other EU citizens and the idea of the four freedoms of movement. E.g. an idea of the union is that labour shall be able to work (and move) freely within the internal European market. Some Swedish regulations have been found as discriminating in the meaning of EU law and have therefore been forbidden to use against EU citizens. However these rules are still valid in the relations to non-citizens; e.g. a limited company that is situated outside the union. One of the most internationally known cases on this issue is the so called Laval case where the Swedish Lex Britannia principle of an extended right for workers' unions to execute strike actions against foreign employers was held to be discriminating in the sense of EU law.
The first international private law question, the question of jurisdiction is in the inter-European relations governed by the Brussels I Regulation (for EU member states) and the Lugano Convention for the EFTA countries with an exemption for Lichtenstein (i.e.: Norway, Iceland and Switzerland).2 The Brussels Regime states that a juridical or natural person domiciled in the EU may, as a main rule, only be sued in her domestic state.
There are a few important exceptions that state when a defendant may have to appear in the court of another member state. The most important exception is the possibility for the parties to agree on the place of the court (forum choice). This can e.g. be done through a prorogation clause in a collective agreement, but also through an agreement when the dispute already is arisen. Further, the separation of contractual and non-contractual damages is important for the question of jurisdiction. When a forum state is not agreed in the collective agreement through a prorogation clause, the court has to follow the rules within the Brussels Regime. When the dispute deals with a contract, the court first has to try to decide the forum solutionis, which is the state where the main obligation is performed. The main obligation for a collective agreement is hard to define due to its nature of sometimes being treated as semi law. The author of this thesis concludes that the main obligation either might be to provide labour and to work or just to follow the contract (pacta sunt servanda). For a tort or delict case on collective labour law the most accurate exemption is that a defendant has to appear in the state where the damage has been done or might be done. When a company has an establishment abroad they also will be obligated to appear in the courts of that state in cases related to the establishment. When a third party interferes a dispute between two parties the case can be dealt with by the courts of the interfering party. Furthermore, there are a number of exceptions for weaker party contracts where the weaker party has a more beneficial right to sue the stronger part than in the normal case. An employee qualifies as a weaker party but a workers' union does not, why the matter is not further dealt with in the essay.
The choice of law question is regulated by the Rome I and the Rome II regulations on choice of law on contractual, respectively non-contractual obligations. The regulations are enacted in order to harmonize the choice of law by the member states of the EU and they have universal applicability, i.e. whichever law that may be pointed out by the regulations will be applicable for the court. There are though national limitations to how far the foreign law will be interpreted. In the case where the issue relates to contractual obligations the governing law will be the law that is chosen by the parties or, when no law has been chosen, the law that most closely relates to the relevant contractual obligation.
An interesting phenomenon within the harmonizing instrument of the Rome Convention is the opportunity to declare national rules as internationally imperative. The 25 a § of the central Swedish code on collective labour law (Medbestämmandelagen) has been declared as imperative. The rule is special in the sense that it states that even though a foreign law has been pointed out for the interpretation of a collective agreement, the legality of a strike action shall be decided by Swedish law. This may result in precarious situations where a collective agreement that would have been dismissed because it is regarded as enforced by duress in accordance with the governing law that is pointed out by the Rome I Regulation. However, the outcome in Sweden will be contrary because the strike action is allowed in accordance to Swedish law and the choice of law clause that states that the entire collective agreement will be governed by Swedish law will also be valid.
3
The question of enforceability addresses the issue of how a foreign verdict can be enforced through Swedish authorities. Normally, a foreign verdict will not be enforced in Sweden. However, there is an important exception for verdicts governed by the Brussels Regime. It shall be stressed that the opposite presumption governs arbitrational verdicts. Arbitrational verdicts will, in other words, be enforced internationally.
A conclusive chapter (chapter 5) discusses some of the mere interesting problems in the opinion of the author. A comprehensive inference is that the EU regulations that aim to harmonize the inter-European market are toothless due to the use of national interpretations and imperative national legislation.
The practical advice given to practicing lawyers, employers and workers' unions is to use the possibilities of enclosing the collective agreements with prorogation clauses and choice of law clauses in order to minimize the risk of unforeseen consequences. As a de lege ferenda argumentation the author wants to see a greater uniformity of the Brussels Regulation and the Swedish national independent laws on jurisdiction in order to secure a better foreseeability. Further it is argued that the EU harmonization differs dangerously from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and that this carries the risk to see a mirage of harmonization in the EU. An over-grasping opinion of the thesis can be summarized in the fundamental opinion that the parties should be able to predict the consequences of their actions.},
  author       = {Sinander, Erik},
  keyword      = {Arbetsrätt,Internationell privaträtt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Internationellt privat- och processrättsliga frågor rörande den svenska kollektiva arbetsrätten},
  year         = {2010},
}