SCC Case 45/2000 - Chapter 17 - 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:
Gustaf Möller, Justice of the Supreme Court of Finland.
Jan Ramberg, Professor Emeritus, Stockholm, Vice-Chair of ICC Commission on International Commercial Practice.
Originally from SCC Arbitral Awards 1999-2003
Preview Page
Subject-matters:
(1) Invalidity of a contract under the Swedish doctrine of assumptions (förutsättningsläran).
(2) Liability for damages following the invalidity of a contract by virtue of the doctrine of assumptions.
Findings:
(1) Where an assumption relating to certain facts has been decisive for party A for entering into an underwriting agreement with party B and where party B must have been aware of the assumption and its
importance to party A and where such assumption is created by a promise from party B and where such promise is broken by the same party without a valid excuse then party B must bear the risk for the failure of party A’s assumption and the failure of such assumption may render the contract invalid.
(2) Failure to fulfil a commitment outside the invalidated contract may constitute ground to claim damages (culpa in contrahendo).
XVII. SCC case 45/2000
Subject-matters:
(1) Invalidity of a contract under the Swedish doctrine of assumptions (förutsättningsläran).
(2) Liability for damages following the invalidity of a contract by
virtue of the doctrine of assumptions.
Observations by Gustaf Moller
Observations by Jan Ramberg