Invändning om bristande kontradiktion i privatdomarförfarande
(2014) JURM02 20141Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Vid sidan av civilprocess och skiljeförfarande kan kommersiella parter av-tala om att en tvist dem emellan ska avgöras av en inhyrd konsult. Om tvis-ten genomförs som att judiciellt förfarande benämns förfarandet i den här uppsatsen privatdomarförfarande. Konsulten benämns privatdomare.
I civilprocessen och i skiljeförfarandet kräver lagregler att en part ska ha möjlighet att få uttala sig innan avgörandet. I svensk rätt ryms principen inom den kontradiktoriska grundsatsen. I common law ryms principen inom natural justice. Det är oklart huruvida en privatdomare behöver rätta sig efter den kontradiktoriska grundsatsen.
Uppsatsen behandlar vilka invändningar om bristande kontradiktion som skulle vara relevanta att åberopa för att... (More) - Vid sidan av civilprocess och skiljeförfarande kan kommersiella parter av-tala om att en tvist dem emellan ska avgöras av en inhyrd konsult. Om tvis-ten genomförs som att judiciellt förfarande benämns förfarandet i den här uppsatsen privatdomarförfarande. Konsulten benämns privatdomare.
I civilprocessen och i skiljeförfarandet kräver lagregler att en part ska ha möjlighet att få uttala sig innan avgörandet. I svensk rätt ryms principen inom den kontradiktoriska grundsatsen. I common law ryms principen inom natural justice. Det är oklart huruvida en privatdomare behöver rätta sig efter den kontradiktoriska grundsatsen.
Uppsatsen behandlar vilka invändningar om bristande kontradiktion som skulle vara relevanta att åberopa för att åsidosätta en privatdomares beslut. Uppsatsen inskränker sig till vad som bör gälla för kommersiella, likställda parter i Sverige. I uppsatsen fokuseras på privatdomarförfaranden inom ent-reprenadrätten, men resonemangen är av principiell natur.
Eftersom det i hög grad saknas litteratur och praxis om privatdomarförfa-rande bygger resonemangen på avtalsrättsliga och processuella principer. En jämförelse har gjorts med vilka regler för kontradiktion som gäller i skilje-förfarande och i adjudication. Adjudication är ett lagreglerat privatdomar-förfarande för entreprenadtvister i Storbritannien.
Enligt uppsatsens analys krävs för att en invändning ska vara framgångsrik att kontradiktionsbristen är relevant, vilket även påverkas av parternas dis-positioner och statens krav på rättssäkerhet. (Less) - Abstract
- Instead of using litigation or arbitration, commercial parties may hire a con-sultant to settle their dispute. If the dispute resolution method is judicial in its character, this thesis defines it as private judging (privatdomarför-farande). The consultant is called a private judge (privatdomare).
Litigation and arbitration have rules granting the parties to a dispute the right to prior notice and the right to be heard before a decision is made. In Swedish law this right is granted by the principle called den kontra-diktoriska grundsatsen, (translated in this summary to the adversarial prin-ciple). In common law the right to prior notice and the right to be heard is granted by the rules of natural justice. It is unclear if a private judge... (More) - Instead of using litigation or arbitration, commercial parties may hire a con-sultant to settle their dispute. If the dispute resolution method is judicial in its character, this thesis defines it as private judging (privatdomarför-farande). The consultant is called a private judge (privatdomare).
Litigation and arbitration have rules granting the parties to a dispute the right to prior notice and the right to be heard before a decision is made. In Swedish law this right is granted by the principle called den kontra-diktoriska grundsatsen, (translated in this summary to the adversarial prin-ciple). In common law the right to prior notice and the right to be heard is granted by the rules of natural justice. It is unclear if a private judge needs to observe the adversarial principle.
This thesis considers what challenges to a private judge’s decision due to a breach of the adversarial principle should be successful. The thesis only deals with the law concerning equal commercial parties in Sweden. It focus-es on private judging within the construction industry, but the reasoning is often general to its nature.
Due to the lack of literature and case law on private judging, the reasoning is based on principles of contract law and procedural law. A comparison is made with the rules concerning the adversarial principle in arbitration and adjudication. Adjudication is a special form of private judging governed by statute in the United Kingdom.
This thesis concludes that in order for a challenge to a decision to be suc-cessful, the breach of the adversarial principle has to be relevant, consider-ing the conduct of the parties and the state’s demand on legal security. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4588180
- author
- Badics, Fredrik LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Challenging a private judge's decision
- course
- JURM02 20141
- year
- 2014
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- civilrätt, avtalsrätt, processrätt, privatdomare, privatdomarförfarande, god mansavgörande, expert, värderingsman, kontradiktion, kontradiktoriska grundsatsen, adjudication, skiljeförfarande, dispute board, expert determination, natural justice
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4588180
- date added to LUP
- 2014-09-03 07:38:14
- date last changed
- 2014-09-03 07:38:14
@misc{4588180,
abstract = {{Instead of using litigation or arbitration, commercial parties may hire a con-sultant to settle their dispute. If the dispute resolution method is judicial in its character, this thesis defines it as private judging (privatdomarför-farande). The consultant is called a private judge (privatdomare).
Litigation and arbitration have rules granting the parties to a dispute the right to prior notice and the right to be heard before a decision is made. In Swedish law this right is granted by the principle called den kontra-diktoriska grundsatsen, (translated in this summary to the adversarial prin-ciple). In common law the right to prior notice and the right to be heard is granted by the rules of natural justice. It is unclear if a private judge needs to observe the adversarial principle.
This thesis considers what challenges to a private judge’s decision due to a breach of the adversarial principle should be successful. The thesis only deals with the law concerning equal commercial parties in Sweden. It focus-es on private judging within the construction industry, but the reasoning is often general to its nature.
Due to the lack of literature and case law on private judging, the reasoning is based on principles of contract law and procedural law. A comparison is made with the rules concerning the adversarial principle in arbitration and adjudication. Adjudication is a special form of private judging governed by statute in the United Kingdom.
This thesis concludes that in order for a challenge to a decision to be suc-cessful, the breach of the adversarial principle has to be relevant, consider-ing the conduct of the parties and the state’s demand on legal security.}},
author = {{Badics, Fredrik}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Invändning om bristande kontradiktion i privatdomarförfarande}},
year = {{2014}},
}