Advanced

Tvistinvesterares finansiering av skiljetvister: Om kostnadsregleringen i lagen om skiljeförfarande

Hesslin, Carl LU (2018) JURM02 20181
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
In recent years, international literature and debate has brought attention to the fact that it has become increasingly common for third-party funders to partially or fully finance a party’s arbitration and litigation costs. This essay examines if, and in what manner, Swedish arbitration cost regulations gov-ern the issue of third-party financing of a party to the arbitration. The essay uses a traditional legal method in order to answer the essay’s questions about applicable law.

When awarding costs at the end of the arbitral proceedings, the question of how a party has financed its’ arbitration proceedings should not affect the tribunals allocation of costs. The reason for this is that costs are allocated based on the outcome of the... (More)
In recent years, international literature and debate has brought attention to the fact that it has become increasingly common for third-party funders to partially or fully finance a party’s arbitration and litigation costs. This essay examines if, and in what manner, Swedish arbitration cost regulations gov-ern the issue of third-party financing of a party to the arbitration. The essay uses a traditional legal method in order to answer the essay’s questions about applicable law.

When awarding costs at the end of the arbitral proceedings, the question of how a party has financed its’ arbitration proceedings should not affect the tribunals allocation of costs. The reason for this is that costs are allocated based on the outcome of the case and/or the parties’ conduct during the ar-bitral proceedings. Therefore, the fact that a party has been funded by a third-party funder does not give rise to make an exception from articles 1-6 in Chapter 18 of the Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure.

Article 8 in Chapter 18 of the Swedish Code of Judicial Proceedings gives no guidance as to whether a party should be considered to have had legal costs when a third-party funder has paid for these. However, according to case law, a party can only be reimbursed for costs that have been incurred by the party. The obligation to reimburse a third-party funder should be suffi-cient for tribunals to accept that a party has incurred costs. A funded party cannot recover costs directly linked to the costs of the financing it has re-ceived from the third-party funder. The main reason for this is partly that such costs are not recoverable in accordance to article 8 in Chapter 18 of the Swedish Code of Judicial Proceedings, partly because such costs are not reasonably incurred to safeguard the party’s interest.

If a funded party loses the arbitral proceedings and is insolvent, there are no explicit provisions that allow an arbitral tribunal to issue a costs order against a third-party funder. However, due to NJA 2014 p. 877, a third-party fun-der could possibly be held responsible for the non-funded party’s costs in a subsequent court proceeding. Responsibility requires that the main purpose of the financing of the funded party was to evade the Swedish Code of Judicial Proceedings’ provisions on the allocation of costs. A non-funded party cannot sue a third-party funder located outside of the EU in front of a state court, if the third-party funder has not undertaken responsibility for the non-funded party’s costs in the funding agreement. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Under de senaste åren har det i den internationella litteraturen och debatten uppmärksammats att det blivit allt vanligare att externa finansiärer helt eller delvis finansierar en parts processföring. Denna framställning undersöker om och i så fall på vilket sätt de svenska kostnadsbestämmelserna vid skiljeför-farande reglerar frågan om tredje mans finansiering av parts processföring. Den rättsdogmatiska metoden har använts för att besvara framställningens frågor om gällande rätt.

Hur en part finansierar sin processföring bör inte inverka på hur fördelningen av kostnadsansvaret mellan parterna i ett skiljeförfarande avgörs. Anled-ningen härtill är att omständigheter vilka kan komma att påverka denna frå-geställning i huvudsak hänför... (More)
Under de senaste åren har det i den internationella litteraturen och debatten uppmärksammats att det blivit allt vanligare att externa finansiärer helt eller delvis finansierar en parts processföring. Denna framställning undersöker om och i så fall på vilket sätt de svenska kostnadsbestämmelserna vid skiljeför-farande reglerar frågan om tredje mans finansiering av parts processföring. Den rättsdogmatiska metoden har använts för att besvara framställningens frågor om gällande rätt.

Hur en part finansierar sin processföring bör inte inverka på hur fördelningen av kostnadsansvaret mellan parterna i ett skiljeförfarande avgörs. Anled-ningen härtill är att omständigheter vilka kan komma att påverka denna frå-geställning i huvudsak hänför sig till parternas processföring och inte hur de har finansierat densamma. Undantag från 18 kap. 1-6 §§ rättegångsbalken påkallas således inte av att en part har finansierats av en tvistinvesterare.

18 kap. 8 § första stycket rättegångsbalken ger ingen vägledning i frågan huruvida en part ska anses ha haft rättegångskostnader när en extern finansiär har betalat för dessa. Av praxis följer dock att en part endast kan få ersättning för sådana kostnader som parten faktiskt har ådragit sig. Parten ska med andra ord ha haft egna utlägg eller en återbetalningsskyldighet till sin finansiär för att få ersättning av motparten. En finansierad part kan inte få ersättning för kostnader direkt kopplade till den finansiering som parten har fått från en tvistinvesterare. Anledningen härtill är dels att vissa kostna-der inte omfattas av sådana kostnader som anges i 18 kap. 8 § första stycket rättegångsbalken, dels att vissa kostnader inte varit skäligen påkallade för tillvaratagande av partens rätt.

För det fall en finansierad part förlorar skiljetvisten och är insolvent, saknas det uttryckliga bestämmelser som gör det möjligt att ålägga en tvistinveste-rare att betala en vinnande parts skiljeförfarandekostnader. Med anledning av NJA 2014 s. 877 kan en vinnande svarandepart emellertid vända sig mot en tvistinvesterare med krav på ersättning i en efterföljande process om syf-tet med tvistinvesterarens finansiering av kärandeparten har varit att kringgå rättegångsbalkens regler om fördelning av rättegångskostnader. Slutligen kan en vinnande svarandepart i allmänhet inte väcka talan mot en utländsk tvistinvesterare vid svensk domstol i anledning av skadegörande handling. Det förutsätter att tvistinvesteraren i investeringsavtalet har åtagit sig att ansvara för motpartens kostnader. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Hesslin, Carl LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Third-Party Arbitration Funding: About the Swedish Arbitration Cost Regulations
course
JURM02 20181
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Processrätt, Civilprocessrätt, Civil procedure, Skiljedomsrätt, Rättegångskostnader, Skiljeförfarandekostnader, Tvistinvestering, Extern finansiering, Third-Party Funding, Civilrätt, Förmögenhetsrätt
language
Swedish
id
8939899
date added to LUP
2018-06-08 12:46:20
date last changed
2018-06-08 12:46:20
@misc{8939899,
  abstract     = {In recent years, international literature and debate has brought attention to the fact that it has become increasingly common for third-party funders to partially or fully finance a party’s arbitration and litigation costs. This essay examines if, and in what manner, Swedish arbitration cost regulations gov-ern the issue of third-party financing of a party to the arbitration. The essay uses a traditional legal method in order to answer the essay’s questions about applicable law. 

When awarding costs at the end of the arbitral proceedings, the question of how a party has financed its’ arbitration proceedings should not affect the tribunals allocation of costs. The reason for this is that costs are allocated based on the outcome of the case and/or the parties’ conduct during the ar-bitral proceedings. Therefore, the fact that a party has been funded by a third-party funder does not give rise to make an exception from articles 1-6 in Chapter 18 of the Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure. 

Article 8 in Chapter 18 of the Swedish Code of Judicial Proceedings gives no guidance as to whether a party should be considered to have had legal costs when a third-party funder has paid for these. However, according to case law, a party can only be reimbursed for costs that have been incurred by the party. The obligation to reimburse a third-party funder should be suffi-cient for tribunals to accept that a party has incurred costs. A funded party cannot recover costs directly linked to the costs of the financing it has re-ceived from the third-party funder. The main reason for this is partly that such costs are not recoverable in accordance to article 8 in Chapter 18 of the Swedish Code of Judicial Proceedings, partly because such costs are not reasonably incurred to safeguard the party’s interest. 

If a funded party loses the arbitral proceedings and is insolvent, there are no explicit provisions that allow an arbitral tribunal to issue a costs order against a third-party funder. However, due to NJA 2014 p. 877, a third-party fun-der could possibly be held responsible for the non-funded party’s costs in a subsequent court proceeding. Responsibility requires that the main purpose of the financing of the funded party was to evade the Swedish Code of Judicial Proceedings’ provisions on the allocation of costs. A non-funded party cannot sue a third-party funder located outside of the EU in front of a state court, if the third-party funder has not undertaken responsibility for the non-funded party’s costs in the funding agreement.},
  author       = {Hesslin, Carl},
  keyword      = {Processrätt,Civilprocessrätt,Civil procedure,Skiljedomsrätt,Rättegångskostnader,Skiljeförfarandekostnader,Tvistinvestering,Extern finansiering,Third-Party Funding,Civilrätt,Förmögenhetsrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Tvistinvesterares finansiering av skiljetvister: Om kostnadsregleringen i lagen om skiljeförfarande},
  year         = {2018},
}