Flerstegsklausuler som hinder för skiljeförfarande: En rättsvetenskaplig studie av flerstegsklausulens processrättsliga verkan i internationella skiljeförfaranden
(2024) JURM02 20242Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Flerstegsklausuler är en återkommande tvistlösningsanvisning i internationella avtal och investeringstraktat som anger att parter ska lösa tvister enligt flera steg. Vanligtvis anges skiljeförfarande som slutgiltigt steg. Ett återkommande inledande steg är att de tvistande parterna i första hand ska försöka lösa tvisten genom någon form av förhandling. När en tvist uppkommer kan parterna, trots flerstegsklausulen, vara obenägna att lösa tvisten genom förhandling. Istället kan parterna, av olika skäl, vara benägna att gå direkt till skiljeförfarande.
Uppsatsen syftar till att ta ställning till vilken processuell verkan en flerstegsklausuls försteg har i ett kommersiellt skiljeförfarande med säte i Sverige om en av de tvistande parterna... (More) - Flerstegsklausuler är en återkommande tvistlösningsanvisning i internationella avtal och investeringstraktat som anger att parter ska lösa tvister enligt flera steg. Vanligtvis anges skiljeförfarande som slutgiltigt steg. Ett återkommande inledande steg är att de tvistande parterna i första hand ska försöka lösa tvisten genom någon form av förhandling. När en tvist uppkommer kan parterna, trots flerstegsklausulen, vara obenägna att lösa tvisten genom förhandling. Istället kan parterna, av olika skäl, vara benägna att gå direkt till skiljeförfarande.
Uppsatsen syftar till att ta ställning till vilken processuell verkan en flerstegsklausuls försteg har i ett kommersiellt skiljeförfarande med säte i Sverige om en av de tvistande parterna går direkt till skiljeförfarande. Vidare undersöker och analyserar uppsatsen om bedömningen påverkas av att det är en investeringstvist.
Svensk skiljemannarätt tillåter emellertid i omfattande utsträckning lagvalsavtal avseende både den på tvisten tillämpliga rätten och vilket lands lag som ska tillämpas på skiljeavtalet. Givet parternas möjlighet att avtala om tillämplig lag måste det inledningsvis avgöras enligt vilket lands lag som flerstegsklausulens processuella verkan ska bedömas. Med anledning av att handläggningen av partsinstruktioner som återfinns i skiljeavtal förstås som en förfarandefråga ska svensk skiljemannarätt tillämpas till följd av principen lex arbitri.
Flerstegsklausulens processrättsliga verkan är inte lätt att bedöma. Centrala skiljemannarättsliga principer som ändamålsenlighet och snabbhet måste vägas mot partsautonomin. Vidare måste även den grundläggande principen om rätten till domstolsprövning enligt art. 6(1) EKMR beaktas. Rätten till domstolsprövning kränks inte av flerstegsklausuler som föreskriver vissa åtgärder innan den tvistande parten får tillgång till slutgiltig prövning.
Beträffande kommersiella skiljeförfarande borde en skiljenämnd med hänsyn till den omfattande partsautonomin inte ignorera den föreskrivna ordningen enligt en flerstegsklausul. Mot bakgrund av ändamålsenlighet och syftet med skiljeförfarande borde flerstegsklausulens försteg inte heller inskränka skiljenämndens behörighet. Uppsatsen föreslår att försteget snarast borde påverka talans tillåtlighet och skiljenämnden borde vilandeförklara förfarandet. Detta för att ge parterna tillfälle att följa flerstegsklausulens föreskrivna ordning.
Av de ICSID- och SCC-avgöranden som uppsatsen har analyserat kan det inte utrönas någon klar praxis för förstegets processuella verkan som borde, i sig självt, påverka bedömningen. (Less) - Abstract
- A multi-tiered dispute resolution clause is a recurring dispute resolution mechanism found in long-term international contracts and investment treaties stating that disputes should be resolved in accordance with a pre-defined order. A recurring initial step found in a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause is that disputing parties should, through some sort of negotiation, try to reach an amicable settlement. Nonetheless, when a dispute arises, the parties may not choose negotiation as a recourse. Instead, the parties may, for various reasons, be inclined to go directly to arbitration.
This paper aims to investigate and take a stand on how what procedural effect a commercial arbitral tribunal seated in Sweden should give the initial... (More) - A multi-tiered dispute resolution clause is a recurring dispute resolution mechanism found in long-term international contracts and investment treaties stating that disputes should be resolved in accordance with a pre-defined order. A recurring initial step found in a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause is that disputing parties should, through some sort of negotiation, try to reach an amicable settlement. Nonetheless, when a dispute arises, the parties may not choose negotiation as a recourse. Instead, the parties may, for various reasons, be inclined to go directly to arbitration.
This paper aims to investigate and take a stand on how what procedural effect a commercial arbitral tribunal seated in Sweden should give the initial steps of a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause when the pre-defined order in said clause is not complied with. Further, this paper investigates and analyzes if the assessment of the initial step’s procedural effect should differ if the multi-tiered dispute resolution provision is found in an investment treaty.
However, the Swedish Arbitration Act (1999:116) allows for choice-of-law agreements regarding both the applicable law to the substantive issues of the dispute as well as the law applicable to the arbitration agreement. Thus, the initial issue of this paper is to determine which country’s law the procedural effect of a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause should be assessed against. Given that the handling of party instructions found in arbitration agreements is considered a procedural matter, this assessment falls within the scope of Swedish arbitration law in accordance with the principle of lex arbitri.
The procedural effect of the multi-tiered dispute resolution clause is not easily determined. Key principles of arbitration, such as practicality and speed, must be balanced against the fundamental principle of party autonomy. Furthermore, the principle of right to access to a court as expressed in Art. 6(1) ECHR must also be taken into account. The right to access to a court is however not violated by enforcing a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause.
In the context of commercial arbitration, given the extensive party autonomy, an arbitral tribunal should not ignore the prescribed order under a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause. Nor, in the light of the practicality and purpose of arbitration, should the initial step of the dispute resolution clause limit the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal. Rather, ignoring the initial steps should affect the admissibility of the claim. Thus, this paper suggests that the arbitral tribunal should stay the proceedings giving the parties the opportunity to resolve the dispute in accordance with the dispute clause.
From the ICSID and SCC decisions that this paper has presented, there is no consistency in case law on the procedural effect of a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause that should in of itself determine the assessment. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9179772
- author
- Bjädefors, Viktor LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Multi-tiered dispute resolution clauses as an obstacle to arbitration: A jurisprudential study of the procedural effect of multi-tiered dispute resolution clauses in international arbitration
- course
- JURM02 20242
- year
- 2024
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- civilrätt, skiljeförfarande, civilprocessrätt, internationell privaträtt, investeringsrätt, ICSID, flerstegsklausuler, tvistlösning
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9179772
- date added to LUP
- 2025-01-28 15:53:10
- date last changed
- 2025-01-28 15:53:10
@misc{9179772,
abstract = {{A multi-tiered dispute resolution clause is a recurring dispute resolution mechanism found in long-term international contracts and investment treaties stating that disputes should be resolved in accordance with a pre-defined order. A recurring initial step found in a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause is that disputing parties should, through some sort of negotiation, try to reach an amicable settlement. Nonetheless, when a dispute arises, the parties may not choose negotiation as a recourse. Instead, the parties may, for various reasons, be inclined to go directly to arbitration.
This paper aims to investigate and take a stand on how what procedural effect a commercial arbitral tribunal seated in Sweden should give the initial steps of a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause when the pre-defined order in said clause is not complied with. Further, this paper investigates and analyzes if the assessment of the initial step’s procedural effect should differ if the multi-tiered dispute resolution provision is found in an investment treaty.
However, the Swedish Arbitration Act (1999:116) allows for choice-of-law agreements regarding both the applicable law to the substantive issues of the dispute as well as the law applicable to the arbitration agreement. Thus, the initial issue of this paper is to determine which country’s law the procedural effect of a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause should be assessed against. Given that the handling of party instructions found in arbitration agreements is considered a procedural matter, this assessment falls within the scope of Swedish arbitration law in accordance with the principle of lex arbitri.
The procedural effect of the multi-tiered dispute resolution clause is not easily determined. Key principles of arbitration, such as practicality and speed, must be balanced against the fundamental principle of party autonomy. Furthermore, the principle of right to access to a court as expressed in Art. 6(1) ECHR must also be taken into account. The right to access to a court is however not violated by enforcing a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause.
In the context of commercial arbitration, given the extensive party autonomy, an arbitral tribunal should not ignore the prescribed order under a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause. Nor, in the light of the practicality and purpose of arbitration, should the initial step of the dispute resolution clause limit the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal. Rather, ignoring the initial steps should affect the admissibility of the claim. Thus, this paper suggests that the arbitral tribunal should stay the proceedings giving the parties the opportunity to resolve the dispute in accordance with the dispute clause.
From the ICSID and SCC decisions that this paper has presented, there is no consistency in case law on the procedural effect of a multi-tiered dispute resolution clause that should in of itself determine the assessment.}},
author = {{Bjädefors, Viktor}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Flerstegsklausuler som hinder för skiljeförfarande: En rättsvetenskaplig studie av flerstegsklausulens processrättsliga verkan i internationella skiljeförfaranden}},
year = {{2024}},
}