SCC Case 17/1997 - Chapter 1 - SCC Arbitral Awards - 1999-2003

About the Editors:
Sigvard Jarvin has been involved in more than 215 international arbitrations under the arbitration rules of the ICC, the Stockholm Arbitration Institute, the Dutch Arbitration Institute, the American Arbitration Association, LCIA, UNCITRAL, the Cairo Regional Centre, and other arbitration organizations. He was general counsel to the ICC International Court of Arbitration, Paris (1982-1987) and member of the Court (1988-1995). He also chaired the ICC working party revising the ICC/CMI Maritime Arbitration Rules (1997-1998).

Mr. Jarvin was the rapporteur at the 1990 and 1998 ICCA Congresses and was chairman of the foreign section of the Swedish Bar from 1999 to 2000, and he is also a member of the board of the Institute of Arbitration Law at Stockholm University and a member of the ICC Commission on Arbitration and the International Arbitration Club, London. He is cited yearly as one of the best arbitration lawyers in France in Chambers Global — The World’s Leading Lawyers , published by Chambers & Partners.

Annette Magnusson, is a Professional Support Lawyer at the firm of Mannheimer Swartling, Stockholm. She was formerly Assistant Secretary General and legal counsel for the Arbitration Institute of the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce.

Observation Commentary by:

John Kadelburger, Partner, Gedda & Ekdahl Advokatbyra, Stockholm.

PDF102.86 KB

$40.00

Description:

Originally from SCC Arbitral Awards 1999-2003

Preview Page

Subject-matters:

(1) Jurisdiction; interpretation of contract under Swedish law.
(2) Validity of assignment and the right of assumed assignee [Claimant] to rely on the arbitration clause.
(3) Can a third party beneficiary rely on the arbitration clause in an agreement to which it is not a party?
(4) Reduction of the claimed legal expenses.

Findings:
(1) Under Swedish law, the wording of a contract in writing is preferred unless one could establish a different common intention of the parties.
(2) Where the contract provides for the right of a party to assign, cede and transfer obligations (but not rights) an assignment cannot validly include the arbitration clause.
(3) Although several stipulations in the contract concluded between X and Y indicate that Z has a position as third party beneficiary, they are inconsistent with the prohibition under the contract to transfer rights and exclude the right for Z to rely on the arbitration clause in the contract. Case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
(4) The amount claimed by Respondent is excessive bearing in mind the relatively limited scope and complexity of the issues involved in the matter of jurisdiction.

Table of Contents:

I. SCC case 17/1997

Subject-matters:

(1) Jurisdiction; interpretation of contract under Swedish law.

(2) Validity of assignment and the right of assumed assignee [Claimant] to rely on the arbitration clause.

(3) Can a third party beneficiary rely on the arbitration clause in an agreement to which it is not a party?

(4)Reduction of the claimed legal expenses.

Observations By John Kadelburger