International arbitration law and rules in Sweden

1.1 Arbitration in Sweden has a long history that dates back to as early as the 14th century. However, rules governing the arbitral proceedings were first adopted in the Arbitration Act of 1887. The Arbitration Act of 1887 was later replaced by a new Arbitration Act in 1929.

1.2 The current Swedish Arbitration Act (Arbitration Act) came into force on 1 April 1999 and was revised in 2019. 1  The main objectives of the revision were to ensure that arbitral proceedings remain an effective method of dispute resolution and to make Sweden a more attractive venue for arbitration.

1.3 In 1917, the SCC Arbitration Institute was established as an independent entity within the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce. Ever since, the SCC Arbitration Institute has provided a neutral, independent, and impartial venue for dispute resolution. In 2023, the SCC Arbitration Institute registered 175 new cases, 55 per cent of which were international disputes and 45 per cent were Swedish disputes.

1.4 The SCC provides unofficial translations of the Swedish Arbitration Act, Swedish Contracts Act, Sale of Goods Act, and Interest Act. 2

2.1 The SCC Arbitration Institute was founded in 1917 as a non-profit and independent entity within the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce. 3

2.2 The SCC Arbitration Institute offers services such as ordinary arbitration under the SCC Arbitration Rules, expedited arbitration under the SCC Expedited Arbitration Rules, SCC Express, SCC Emergency Arbitrator, mediation and several ad-hoc services.

2.3 Like the Arbitration Act, the SCC Arbitration Rules do not provide a comprehensive set of procedural rules but instead give the parties and the arbitrators a basis to form an effective procedure adapted for the individual case. The rules provide for a procedure in line with the best practices in international arbitration.

2.4 In 2021, the SCC Arbitration Institute launched the SCC Express, which is dispute resolution within three weeks for a fixed fee. The SCC appoints a neutral legal expert to give their opinion on the merits of the case within three weeks. The opinion is neither enforceable nor binding on the parties, unless they have specifically agreed to this. The main purpose of the service is to help the parties move forward in their contractual relationship and is therefore suitable for contracting parties that have an ongoing business relationship. 

3.1 A dispute must be arbitrable, which means that it must concern a subject matter that can be settled under the laws of Sweden. For example, disputes concerning family and criminal law matters are not arbitrable.

3.2 Arbitration is based on party autonomy. This means that the parties themselves determine the handling of the arbitration and the arbitral tribunal is generally required to follow the parties’ joint instructions. However, the parties’ right to decide the handling of the proceedings is limited. For example, if the parties' joint instructions are in conflict with the rule of law, the arbitrators cannot adhere to them.

3.3 The handling of the proceedings must ensure that the parties are treated equally, that they are given the opportunity to adequately present their case and that the procedure is transparent and reasonably foreseeable. In addition, the arbitral tribunal is required to process the dispute in an impartial, practical, and speedy manner.

3.4 The Arbitration Act is not intended to provide comprehensive regulation of arbitral proceedings. Instead, the legislator has intentionally limited the extent of the regulation of the arbitral proceedings to allow the parties to regulate them as they see fit. For example, the Arbitration Act contains minimal mandatory rules, allowing the parties to opt out of most of its provisions. This has enabled Swedish arbitration to evolve in line with international standards.

3.5 Sweden has not adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law as such. However, when drafting the Arbitration Act the legislator drew heavily on the Model Law.

3.6 The Arbitration Act applies both to domestic and international arbitrations seated in Sweden.

4.1.1 Arbitration is normally based on an agreement stipulating that a dispute should be determined by an arbitral tribunal. However, arbitration can also be based on statutory provisions and on provisions in an association’s statutes or articles of association.

4.1.2 According to the Arbitration Act, there are only a few requirements that must be fulfilled in order for a valid and enforceable arbitration agreement to be in place. 4  If an arbitration is based on an arbitration agreement, contract law applies to the formation of the arbitration agreement in the same way as it applies to any other contract. This means, inter alia, that the contracting parties must have legal capacity to enter into the arbitration agreement and that the parties may reach a settlement regarding the subject matter of the dispute.

4.1.3  As mentioned above, the dispute must be arbitrable, which means that it must concern a subject matter that can be resolved under the laws of Sweden.

4.1.4 An arbitration agreement can pertain to both future and existing disputes. An arbitration agreement with respect to future disputes must relate to a legal relationship specified in the agreement. 5  The term legal relationship is also used in the New York Convention.

4.1.5 In a recent case, "Husqvarnas skiljeavtal" ("Husqvarna's Arbitration Agreement"), 6  the Swedish Supreme Court held that the description of the contractual relationship established between the parties through a framework agreement may be sufficiently defined in the framework agreement for an arbitration agreement regarding future disputes arising from both the framework agreement and the subsequent call-off agreements to be considered to constitute a legal relationship. Pursuant to Section 1, first paragraph of the Arbitration Act, an arbitration agreement can apply to future disputes pertaining to a legal relationship defined in agreements that have already been concluded. Thus, an arbitration clause in the framework agreement may also become binding in respect of disputes arising from a call-off agreement, due to the fact that an arbitration clause in the framework agreement supplements and becomes part of the call-off agreement. The court also held that an arbitration agreement contained in general terms and conditions may bind a commercial party, even if the party has not actually read the arbitration agreement.

4.1.6 An arbitration agreement need not be in writing or any other particular form. Oral arbitration agreements and arbitrations agreements concluded through implied actions of the parties are also recognised, but proving their existence may be difficult if disputed. Therefore, it is the best course of action to have a written agreement to avoid any evidentiary problems.

4.2.1 The principle of “Kompetenz-Kompetenz” follows from the Arbitration Act. 7  This entails that the arbitral tribunal is authorised to determine its own jurisdiction.

4.2.2 The term “jurisdiction” in this regard has a broad meaning. Thus, it includes any circumstance which might prevent the arbitral tribunal from conducting a judicial review, in whole or in part, of an issue raised by a party. This means that an arbitral award is null and void or challengeable where such a circumstance exists at the time of the award.

4.2.3 The jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal is subject to review only on the basis of an objection by a party. An objection that the arbitral tribunal lacks jurisdiction relates to the authority of the arbitral tribunal, including the binding nature of the proceedings on the parties, the arbitrability of the subject matter of the dispute, and the presence of procedural impediments. For example, procedural impediments could include whether the arbitral proceedings have been properly initiated, whether the correct number of arbitrators have been appointed, or whether arbitrators with the appropriate qualifications have been appointed.

4.2.4 Irrespective of any objection, the arbitral tribunal should consider whether the dispute is arbitrable or whether an action based on the parties' claims would be invalid because the award, or the manner in which the award arose, is clearly incompatible with the basic principles of the Swedish legal system. 8

4.2.5  If the arbitral tribunal has determined its authority to try a dispute, the unsuccessful party may request a review of the matter by the Court of Appeal. The application must be filed within thirty days of notification of the decision. The arbitral tribunal may continue the arbitration while awaiting the court’s decision.

4.3.1 The doctrine of separability prescribed in the Arbitration Act, entails that when the validity of an arbitration agreement that is part of another agreement is assessed, the arbitration agreement shall be considered as a separate agreement. 9  For example, in situations where the agreement in which the arbitration clause is incorporated is invalid, the arbitration clause could still be valid.

4.4.1 The scope of an arbitration agreement is determined by interpreting the agreement according to general principles of contract interpretation. 10  

4.4.2 The starting point is to endeavour to ascertain what the parties jointly intended by the agreement before entering into it. If the wording of the agreement can be established, it forms the primary basis for interpretation of the agreement. Elements other than the wording of the agreement may only be considered where the wording is unclear or ambiguous.

4.4.3 Thus, there is a strong presumption that the wording of the contract reflects the parties’ intent. The party who claims that the parties’ intention is not reflected in the agreement bears a heavy burden of proof. 

4.4.4 Whether the claim brought by the claimant is covered by the arbitration agreement is a matter of interpretation of the scope of the arbitration agreement. Under Swedish law, when the arbitral tribunal establishes whether the claim falls within the arbitration agreement or not, it assumes that the facts and the legal issues asserted by the claimant are correct, the so-called “doctrine of assertion”. Once the issue of jurisdiction has been determined, the merits of the claims, including all facts and legal issues, will be tried. The doctrine of assertion also applies to the respondent’s objections in the arbitration. The doctrine is mainly used in situations of inter-jurisdictional competition, in which, jurisdiction is determined on the assertions made by the claimant. 

4.5.1 Under the Swedish Contracts Act (Contracts Act) an agreement may be held to be invalid if, for example, it is the product of duress or fraud. 11

4.5.2 Furthermore, under the Contracts Act an agreement, term or condition may be set aside or modified if it is unconscionable having regard to the contents of the agreement, the circumstances prevailing at the time the agreement was entered into, subsequent circumstances, and circumstances in general. 12  This also applies to arbitration agreements.

4.5.3 Section 36 of the Contracts Act is primarily intended for consumer protection and other relations in which one party is inherently weaker than the other. The scope for applying section 36 of the Contracts Act is limited and the principle pacta sunt servanda generally prevails. It should be noted that, under the Arbitration Act, arbitration agreements between businesses and consumers, made before a dispute arises, are generally not valid. 13

4.5.4 Financial difficulties are usually not deemed to be a sufficient reason for avoiding an arbitration agreement based on section 36 of the Contracts Act. However, section 36 of the Contracts Act could be applied to situations where the application of an arbitration agreement would otherwise result in an unreasonable outcome from the perspective of due process or access to justice. This could be the case where the arbitration agreement provides for unequal treatment of the parties in respect of the appointment of arbitrators or if it otherwise gives one party an unfair procedural advantage. However, it is doubtful whether this can apply in an international arbitration between companies.

4.5.5 Additionally, section 36 of the Contracts Act may be used to adjust an arbitration clause that is defective or impossible to apply.

4.5.6 The European Court of Justice has held that EU law precludes the application of provisions in intra-EU investment agreements, which allow investors from one member state to initiate arbitral proceedings against another member state, thus making such arbitration agreements invalid. 14  The European Court of Justice has also held that where an investor-State arbitration clause in an intra-EU bilateral investment treaty is invalid under EU law, investors cannot conclude an ad hoc arbitration agreement with identical content to the arbitration clause. 15

4.5.7 In several cases following the above ruling, Swedish courts have annulled awards regarding intra-EU bilateral investment agreements on the grounds that they were incompatible with Swedish public policy, in order to protect a fundamental principle, not only of the Swedish legal order, but also of EU law, namely the primacy of EU law. 16

5.1.1 There are only a few mandatory qualifications for arbitrators under the Arbitration Act.

5.1.2 The Arbitration Act provides that an arbitrator shall have full legal capacity in regard to their actions and property. 17  This means that the person appointed as arbitrator must be over 18 years of age and not bankrupt or under any form of guardianship.

5.1.3 In addition, under the Arbitration Act, an arbitrator shall be impartial and independent. 18  If a party so requests, an arbitrator shall be released from the appointment if there exists any circumstance that may diminish confidence in the arbitrator’s impartiality or independence. Examples of such circumstances are listed in section 8 of the Arbitration Act:

1. if the arbitrator or a person closely associated with the arbitrator is a party, or otherwise may expect noteworthy benefit or detriment as a result of the outcome of the dispute; 
2. if the arbitrator or a person closely associated with the arbitrator is the director of a company or any other association which is a party, or otherwise represents a party or any other person who may expect noteworthy benefit or detriment as a result of the outcome of the dispute; 
3. if the arbitrator, in the capacity of expert or otherwise, has taken a position in the dispute, or has assisted a party in the preparation or conduct of its case in the dispute; or 
4. if the arbitrator has received or demanded compensation which has not been agreed jointly by the parties. 19

5.1.4 The Arbitration Act states that a person who is asked to accept an appointment as arbitrator shall immediately disclose all circumstances which might be considered to prevent the person from serving as arbitrator. 20  An arbitrator shall inform the parties and the other arbitrators of such circumstances as soon as all arbitrators have been appointed and thereafter in the course of the arbitral proceedings as soon as the arbitrator has learned of any new circumstance.

5.1.5 The 2014 IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest in International Commercial Arbitration set out seven general standards of impartiality and disclosure to govern the selection, appointment and continuing role of an arbitrator. The IBA Guidelines have influenced Swedish court decisions on a number of occasions, and they commonly serve as guidelines for the parties and the arbitral tribunal. 21

5.2.1 The procedure for challenging an arbitrator based on a circumstance set out in section 8 of the Arbitration Act shall be made within fifteen days of the party becoming aware of the appointment of the arbitrator and of the existence of the relevant circumstance. The request shall be considered by the arbitrators unless the parties have agreed that it shall be considered by another person. 22  If the challenge is successful, the decision shall not be subject to appeal. 

5.2.2 A party who is dissatisfied with a decision denying a challenge or dismissing a challenge as untimely may file an application with an authorised district court that the arbitrator be released from their appointment. The application must be submitted within thirty days from the date on which the party was notified of the decision. The arbitrators may continue the arbitral proceedings pending the determination of the district court. 

5.2.3 Under the Arbitration Act the parties may agree that a challenge of an arbitrator shall be conclusively determined by an arbitration institution. 23

5.2.4 If an arbitrator resigns or is released due to circumstances which were known at the time of appointment, the district court shall, upon the request of a party, appoint a new arbitrator. 24  If the arbitrator was appointed by a party, the district court shall appoint the person suggested by that party, unless there is special cause not to do so. 

5.2.5 If an arbitrator cannot complete the assignment due to circumstances which arise after his or her appointment, the person who originally was required to make the appointment shall instead appoint a new arbitrator. 25

5.3.1 The parties may determine the number of arbitrators of the arbitral tribunal and the procedure for the appointment of the arbitrators. If the parties have not agreed on the number of arbitrators and procedure for the appointment, the default rule under the Arbitration Act is that the arbitral tribunal shall consist of three arbitrators and that each party appoints one arbitrator, and the arbitrators appointed by the parties appoint the third arbitrator. 26  Furthermore, one of the arbitrators shall be appointed chairperson and the chairperson shall be the arbitrator appointed by the other arbitrators. 27

5.3.2 If each party is required to appoint an arbitrator and one party has notified the opposing party of its choice of arbitrator in a request for arbitration, the opposing party must, within thirty days of receipt of the notice, notify the first party in writing of its choice of arbitrator. 28  A party who has notified the opposing party of its choice of arbitrator in this manner may not revoke the choice without the consent of the opposing party. 

5.3.3 If the opposing party fails to appoint an arbitrator within the specified time, the district court shall appoint an arbitrator upon the request of the first party. 

6.1.1 Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral proceedings are initiated when a party receives a request for arbitration. A request for arbitration must be in writing and include: 

1. an express and unconditional request for arbitration; 
2. a statement of the issue which is covered by the arbitration agreement and which is to be resolved by the arbitrators; and 
3. a statement of the party’s choice of arbitrator, if the party is required to appoint an arbitrator. 29

6.1.2 Therefore, a request for arbitration becomes effective and the arbitration initiates when the opposing party receives a request for arbitration in accordance with the requirements set out in the Arbitration Act. 30

6.1.3 It is important that the party requesting arbitration secures evidence when the request for arbitration was received by the opposing party since the initiation of an arbitration may have legal consequences in various respects.

6.1.4 Under the Arbitration Act, the date on which the opposing party receives the request for arbitration is deemed equivalent to initiating a legal action before a court of law. 31  Therefore, the receipt of the request stops any statutory time bar.

6.1.5 In addition, the date on which the opposing party receives the request for arbitration is relevant to the issue of when the thirty days for the opposing party to appoint an arbitrator and the time period for rendering the award start to run.

6.1.6 At the commencement of the arbitration, the parties, together with the arbitral tribunal, normally determine the practical details of the arbitration by means of a so-called procedural order, often after a case management conference. Such an initial procedural order includes, but is not limited to, the number and timing of witness hearings, the number of exhibits to be presented, and the timeline for the arbitration (see also section 5.5.2 below). The arbitral tribunal may issue further procedural orders during the arbitration.

6.2.1The parties determine which location in Sweden shall be the seat of arbitration. If the parties have not done so, the arbitral tribunal shall determine the seat of arbitration. 32

6.2.2 The seat of arbitration is significant in various legal aspects, such as forum with regard to court assistance during and after the arbitration and applicable law to the proceedings as such. However, the seat of the arbitration is only a legal concept and does not determine the geographical location of the proceedings. The arbitral tribunal may hold hearings and other meetings elsewhere in Sweden or abroad, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.

6.2.3 In addition, the parties decide on the language of the arbitration. If the parties have not decided on the language of the proceedings, the arbitral tribunal shall decide the language. This is not stated in the Arbitration Act but follows from the arbitral tribunal’s authority to conduct the arbitration.

6.2.4 When determining the language of the arbitration, the arbitral tribunal shall consider all relevant circumstances, such as the language that has been used by the parties in their business relationship and the language of the agreement in dispute.

6.3.1 Under the Arbitration Act, the arbitral tribunal shall afford the parties, to the extent necessary, an opportunity to present their respective cases in writing (or orally). 33  Additionally, a party shall be given an opportunity to review all documents and all other materials pertaining to the dispute which are supplied to the arbitrators by the opposing party or another person. These are the cornerstones of due process in an arbitration under the Arbitration Act.

6.3.2 The first written submission in an arbitration is the request for arbitration. Within thirty days of the receipt of the request for arbitration, the opposing party must notify the requesting party about its choice of arbitrator. Other than the requirement of appointing an arbitrator within thirty days, the Arbitration Act does not prescribe the manner in which the opposing party is to answer the request for arbitration.

6.3.3 As regards the statement of claim, the claimant shall state its claims in respect of the issue stated in the request for arbitration, as well as the circumstances invoked by the claimant in support thereof within the period of time determined by the arbitral tribunal. 34  Normally, a statement of claim contains:

1. the specific relief sought;
2. the facts and other circumstances the claimant relies on; and
3. any evidence the claimant relies on.

6.3.4 Thereafter, within the period of time determined by the arbitral tribunal, the respondent shall state its position in relation to the claims, and the circumstances invoked by the respondent in support thereof. Typically, a statement of defence includes:

1. any objections concerning the existence, validity or applicability of the arbitration agreement;
2. a statement whether, and to what extent, the respondent admits or denies the relief sought by the claimant;
3. the facts and other circumstances the respondent relies on;
4. any counterclaim or set-off and the facts and other circumstances on which it is based; and
5. any evidence the respondent relies on.

6.3.5 The Arbitration Act does not explicitly set forth any other written submission to be filed by the parties. However, in practice, the parties file further submissions, i.e. a reply to the statement of defence from the claimant and a rejoinder from the respondent. Sometimes the parties also submit post-hearing briefs after an oral hearing.

6.4.1 Under the Arbitration Act the parties are permitted to amend or supplement their claims and invoke new circumstances in support of their case provided that the claims fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement and, taking into consideration the time at which they are submitted or other circumstances, the arbitrators do not consider it inappropriate to adjudicate such claims. 35

6.5.1 The Arbitration Act provides that if a party so requests, and provided that the parties have not otherwise agreed, an oral hearing shall be held prior to the determination of an issue referred to the arbitral tribunal for resolution. 36  Thus, an oral hearing must be held at the request of a party unless the parties previously have agreed not to hold a hearing. The Arbitration Act does not prescribe any other hearings. However, it is common to have additional preparatory hearings during the arbitration.

6.5.2 After the constitution of the arbitral tribunal, the arbitral tribunal normally invites the parties to a case management conference to organise, schedule and establish procedures for the conduct of the arbitration. This case management conference often results in the first procedural order by the arbitral tribunal which sets forth a time table for the proceedings and procedural rules. 37

6.5.3 After the exchange of written submissions, it is customary for the arbitral tribunal to hold a pre-hearing conference or a preparatory meeting before the final hearing. During the pre-hearing conference or preparatory meeting, the arbitrators and the parties discuss the practicalities for the final hearing, such as the time schedule and hearing venue, and any possible uncertainties in the parties’ claims.

6.5.4 A recent Swedish appeal court decision confirmed that, in the absence of an agreement between the parties, it is within the mandate of the arbitral tribunal to decide whether hearings will be held physically or virtually. 38  The decision to hold a hearing virtually must be appropriate, and must enable the parties and the tribunal to conduct the arbitration in accordance with the standards to which physical hearings are held such that due process can be ensured.

6.6.1The Arbitration Act prescribes that if one of the parties, without valid cause, fails to appear at a hearing or otherwise fails to comply with an order of the arbitral tribunal, such failure shall not prevent a continuation of the proceedings and a resolution of the dispute on the merits and on the basis of the existing materials. 39  The arbitral tribunal cannot render a default award. The arbitrators must consider the merits of the case and may not, like in a civil court, dismiss the case or enter judgment by default. A party’s non-involvement does not imply recognition of the circumstances invoked by the opposing party, but it is for the arbitrators to determine the evidential value to be attached to the party’s passivity.

6.7.1Under the Arbitration Act, the parties are responsible for providing and presenting the evidence they wish to rely on. 40  However, the arbitrators may appoint experts, unless both parties are opposed to this.

6.7.2 In general, the parties are free to present any type of document, witness statement, expert report or other evidence they possess to support their case. The arbitral tribunal has the freedom to attribute evidentiary value to any evidence it deems appropriate, regardless of its source. Accordingly, a party may submit evidence obtained illegally or wrongfully, as well as hearsay evidence (the evidentiary value of such evidence is a different matter).

6.7.3 The arbitrators may refuse to admit evidence invoked in two situations:

1. the evidence is manifestly irrelevant to the dispute; or
2. the refusal is justified having regard to the time at which the evidence is invoked. 41

6.7.4 Evidence is rarely refused on the basis of late submission. Usually it requires that a party has failed to comply with an agreed procedural order regarding the production of evidence.

6.7.5 The IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Commercial Arbitration (IBA Rules) contain provisions on the presentation of documents, factual and expert witnesses, the conduct of evidentiary hearings and document production. Although the IBA Rules are not directly applicable to arbitrations held in Sweden unless the parties so agree, it is common for them to serve as guidelines for the parties and the arbitral tribunal. The parties may agree in the Procedural Order that the IBA Rules are to apply.

6.7.6 There is no discovery procedure in arbitrations in Sweden. However, the arbitral tribunal may, at the request of a party, order a party to produce documents. The arbitral tribunal’s decision to order a party to produce documents cannot be legally enforced, but if a party fails to comply with the decision, the arbitral tribunal may infer that such documents would be adverse to the interests of that party. The party may also, with the prior consent of the arbitral tribunal, submit an application for the other party to, for example, produce a document, to the district court.  42  The district court shall grant the application if the evidence sought can be obtained lawfully.

6.8.1 The Arbitration Act sets forth interim measures which may be ordered by an arbitral tribunal. 43  Unless the parties have agreed otherwise, the arbitral tribunal may, at the request of a party, decide that, during the proceedings, the opposing party must undertake a certain interim measure to secure the claim which is to be adjudicated by the arbitral tribunal. The arbitral tribunal may prescribe that the party requesting the interim measure provide reasonable security for the loss which may be incurred by the opposing party as a result of the interim measure. Arbitral tribunals are not authorised to order interim measures against third parties.

6.8.2  Interim measures ordered by an arbitral tribunal cannot be legally enforced in Sweden. A party is therefore also free to apply to a court to obtain an enforceable interim measure even though it has already applied for, or even been granted, an interim measure by the arbitral tribunal. The SCC Rules contain the possibility to request a so-called emergency arbitrator, who can make a decision on interim measures within a few days from the application date. 44

6.9.1 An arbitration may be consolidated with another arbitration, if the parties agree to such consolidation, if it benefits the administration of the arbitration, and if the same arbitrators have been appointed in both arbitrations. 45  The arbitrations may subsequently be separated in the event that there are reasons for such separation.

6.9.2  As regards the appointment of arbitrators, the Arbitration Act states that if arbitration has been requested against several parties and these parties are unable to jointly appoint an arbitrator, the district court shall, upon the request of a respondent, appoint arbitrators on behalf of all parties and simultaneously also discharge any arbitrator already appointed. 46

6.10.1 The issue of confidentiality is not addressed by the Swedish Arbitration Act. In practice, arbitral proceedings are held in private, and there is a general view that the arbitral tribunal must maintain confidentiality throughout the arbitral proceedings. Case law does suggest that a party to arbitral proceedings is not bound by confidentiality unless it has been explicitly agreed with the other party. The SCC Rules however, stipulate that, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the SCC and the arbitral tribunal shall maintain the confidentiality of the arbitration and the award. 47

7.1 The Arbitration Act delineates between an award and a decision.

7.2 Under the Arbitration Act, a determination of the substantive issues in an arbitration, i.e. the merits of the case, shall be decided in an award.  48  Even if the arbitral tribunal terminates the arbitral proceedings without having decided on such issues, this shall also be done through an award, except for the dismissal of an arbitration.

7.3  In addition, if the parties enter into a settlement agreement, the arbitral tribunal may, at the request of the parties, confirm the settlement in an award in accordance with  the Arbitration Act. 49

7.4 Other determinations, which are not decided in an award, are designated as decisions, such as determination of procedural issues. The dismissal of an arbitration is also designated as a decision. 50

7.5  An award is final and binding. Decisions, by contrast, do not gain legal force and are thus unenforceable. Moreover, decisions may – at least as a general rule – be amended by the arbitral tribunal at any stage of the proceedings.

7.6 There are only a few formal requirements to an award under the Arbitration Act. It provides that: 51

1. An award shall be made in writing and be signed by the arbitrators. It suffices that the award is signed by a majority of the arbitrators, provided that the reason why all of the arbitrators have not signed the award is noted therein. The parties may decide that it is enough that the chairperson of the arbitral tribunal alone shall sign the award. 
2. The award shall state the seat of the arbitration and the date when the award is made. 
3. The award shall be delivered or sent to the parties immediately.

7.7 The arbitral tribunal may correct or supplement the award within thirty days of the date of the announcement of the award, if it finds that an award contains any obvious inaccuracy as a consequence of a typographical, computational, or other similar mistake by the arbitrators or any another person, or if the arbitrators by oversight have failed to decide an issue which should have been dealt with in the award. 52

7.8  The arbitral tribunal may also correct or supplement an award, or interpret the decision in an award, if any of the parties so requests within thirty days of receipt of the award by that party.

8.1.1 The Arbitration Act provides an exhaustive list of situations which render an award invalid in whole or in part: 53

1. if the award includes determination of an issue which, in accordance with Swedish law, may not be decided by arbitrators; 
2. if the award, or the manner in which the award arose, is clearly incompatible with the basic principles of the Swedish legal system; or 
3. if the award does not fulfil the requirements with regard to the written form and signature. 54

8.1.2 In a recent Court of Appeal case, an award was challenged on the basis that the arbitrators did not apply wet ink signatures to the award. 55  Instead, the tribunal had pasted their scanned signatures into the Word-version of the award, which was then converted into a PDF file and distributed to the parties by email. The court held that the award did not comply with the formal requirements of section 31 of the Arbitration Act, when signed with such scanned signatures. However, the Court of Appeal found that this was a formal error which could be corrected by the arbitral tribunal. The fact that the arbitrators later provided a signature page signed in wet ink and circulated the award to the parties amounted to a correction of the award. Therefore, the formal requirements of section 31 of the Arbitration Act were satisfied and the invalidity of the award was cured. The application to set aside the award was therefore dismissed.

8.1.3 Invalidity actions pursuant to section 33 of the Arbitration Act are rare.

8.2.1 An award may be set aside in whole or in part upon the request of a party in the situations listed in section 34, first paragraph, of the Arbitration Act: 56

1. if it is not covered by a valid arbitration agreement between the parties; 
2. if the arbitral tribunal has made the award after the expiration of the time limit set by the parties;
3. if the arbitral tribunal has exceeded its mandate, in a manner that probably influenced the outcome; 
4. if the arbitration should not have taken place in Sweden;  
5. if an arbitrator was appointed in a manner that violates the parties’ agreement or the Arbitration Act;
6. if an arbitrator was biased or lacked qualification; or
7. if, without fault of the party, there otherwise occurred procedural error in the course of the proceedings which probably influenced the outcome of the case. 

8.3 Under the Arbitration Act, a party does not have the right to rely on circumstance for the purpose of invalidating an award that the party, by participating in the proceedings without objection or in some other way, is deemed to have waived the right to assert. 57  A waiver of the right to rely on a circumstance typically requires that the party had knowledge of it during the arbitration. In principle, it is not enough that the party should have been aware of the fact.

8.4 The objection should be clearly stated to the arbitral tribunal and raised promptly.

8.5 An action under section 34 of the Arbitration Act must be brought within two months from the date upon which the party received the award or, if correction, supplementation, or interpretation has taken place pursuant to section 32, within a period of two months from the date the party received the award in its final wording. Following the expiration of the time limit, a party may not invoke a new ground for objection in support of its claim.

9.1 Under the Arbitration Act the parties shall be jointly and severally liable to pay reasonable compensation to the arbitrators for work and expenses. 58  In a final award, the arbitral tribunal may order the parties to pay compensation to the arbitrators, together with interest from the date occurring one month following the date of the announcement of the award. The compensation shall be stated separately for each arbitrator.

9.2 The arbitrators may request security for the compensation and may fix separate security for individual claims. 59  If a party fails to provide its share of the requested security within the period specified by the arbitrators, the opposing party may provide the entire security or choose to commence court proceedings. 60  If the requested security is not provided, the arbitrators may terminate the proceedings, in whole or in part.

9.3 In addition to compensation to the arbitrators for work and expenses, an arbitration usually entails costs for registration and administration fees of the arbitral institution, including the institution’s expenses, and costs incurred by each party, including fees for legal representation.

9.4 Under the Arbitration Act, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, the arbitral tribunal may, upon the request of a party, order the opposing party to pay compensation for the party’s costs and determine the manner in which the compensation to the arbitrators shall be finally allocated between the parties. 61  The arbitral tribunal cannot order a party to pay the opposing party’s costs unless the opposing party has requested it. The same applies in regards to interest.

9.5 If the parties have not agreed on these issues, the rules regarding litigation costs in Chapter 18 of the Swedish Code of Judicial Procedure (Code of Judicial Procedure) are normally applied by the arbitral tribunal. 62  These rules principally follow the principles applicable in international arbitrations.

9.6 According to the Code of Judicial Procedure, compensation for litigation costs shall fully cover the costs of preparation for trial and presentation of the case including fees for representation and counsel, to the extent that the costs were reasonably incurred to safeguard the party’s interest. 63  Further, the compensation shall also be paid for the time and effort expended by the party itself, i.e. the client, by reason of the litigation.

9.7 As regards the allocation of costs between the parties, the general rule under the Code of Judicial Procedure is that the losing party shall reimburse the opposing party for the litigation costs.

10.1 Sections 46–51 of the Arbitration Act contain a set of rules regarding different international matters. The most relevant ones are summarised below.

10.2 Sections 46 and 47 of the Arbitration Act defines a Swedish arbitration, i.e. when the Arbitration Act applies. Even if an arbitration has an international connection, the arbitration may be Swedish.

10.3 Section 48 of the Arbitration Act prescribes the law that governs the arbitration agreement. If the arbitration agreement has an international connection, it is governed by the law chosen by the parties. If the parties have not chosen any law, the arbitration agreement is governed by the same law as the arbitral proceedings.

11.1.1 An award rendered abroad shall be deemed to be a foreign award. 64  An award shall be deemed to have been rendered in the country where the arbitration had its seat. Consequently, an award rendered by an arbitral tribunal seated in Sweden shall be deemed to be a Swedish award.

11.1.2 A Swedish arbitral award may in principle be enforced in Sweden in the same manner as a domestic court judgment under the Swedish Enforcement Code (Enforcement Code), without being preceded by any exequatur procedure. 65

11.1.3 Under the Enforcement Code, the Swedish Enforcement Authority may enforce a Swedish arbitral award provided that: 66

1. the arbitration agreement does not contain any reservation concerning the right of a party to institute an action against the award or, where there is such a reservation, the time for the party’s action has expired without the action having been presented; and
2. the award satisfies the rules concerning writing and signature. 67

11.2.1 A foreign arbitral award is not directly enforceable in Sweden but must pass an exequatur procedure.

11.2.2 The general rule is that a foreign arbitral award shall be recognised and enforced in Sweden. 68  The provision also sets forth that the party opposing recognition and enforcement, bears the burden of proof that the arbitral award shall not be recognised and enforced.

11.2.3 The Arbitration Act exclusively governs when recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award may be refused. 69

11.2.4 Section 54 of the Arbitration Act is based on Article V(I) of the New York Convention and sets forth five exceptions for when a foreign arbitral award will not be recognised and enforced in Sweden. In summary, section 54 provides that an award cannot be enforced if:

1. the signatory of the arbitration agreement was unauthorised or the arbitration agreement is invalid;
2. due process has been violated;
3. the arbitral tribunal has exceeded its mandate;
4. the arbitrators were not properly appointed; or
5. the award is not binding and enforceable in the country where it was made.

11.2.5 Section 55 of the Arbitration Act  is based on Article V(II) of the New York Convention and, in summary, provides that an award shall not be recognised and enforced if:

1. the award includes determination of issues which are not arbitrable under Swedish law; or
2. it would be contrary to Swedish public policy to enforce it.

11.2.6 Unlike the circumstances set out in section 54 of the Arbitration Act, the court shall consider the circumstances set out in section 55 of the Arbitration Act on its own initiative. 

11.2.7 An application for the enforcement of a foreign award shall be lodged with the Svea Court of Appeal.