Arbitration at the SCC

Arbitral awards are final and binding with very limited grounds for challenge. Unlike court judgements, awards cannot be appealed on substantive grounds such as disagreement with the arbitrators’ legal or factual conclusions.

Limited challenge grounds include:

• Lack of valid arbitration agreement
• Procedural irregularities affecting due process
• Arbitrator misconduct or bias
• Awards exceeding the scope of submission

Success rates for challenges are extremely low, typically under 5%, ensuring finality and enforceability.

Most SCC arbitrations conclude within 6-12 months, significantly faster than court litigation. Factors affecting duration include:

• Case complexity and number of issues
• Amount of evidence requiring review
• Number of witnesses and experts
• Arbitrator and party availability for hearings
• Procedural choices made by parties and tribunal

Expedited procedures can deliver awards within 3-6 months, whilst complex international disputes may require 12-18 months

Fees are based on the amount in dispute and can be calculated using the SCC Cost Calculator. These fees cover the arbitrators’ remuneration and the SCC’s administrative costs. The largest portion of overall expenses often arises from legal representation, but the SCC’s efficient procedures help to reduce these costs.

Yes, SCC arbitration is strictly confidential. Confidentiality covers:

• All proceedings including hearings and deliberations
• Documentary evidence and written submissions
• Arbitral awards and procedural decisions
• Settlement discussions and negotiations

Exceptions to confidentiality:

• Disclosure required by law in certain jurisdictions
• Enforcement proceedings where award disclosure may be necessary
• Regulatory reporting requirements in specific industries

Parties may agree to additional confidentiality measures or limited disclosure for specific purposes.

In most cases, yes. Parties may nominate their arbitrators, subject to confirmation by the SCC, ensuring both independence and impartiality.

Yes, a valid arbitration agreement is essential for SCC jurisdiction. Best practice includes:

Pre-dispute arbitration clauses in commercial contracts specifying:

Number of arbitrators (one or three)

SCC as administering institution

Stockholm as seat of arbitration

English as language of proceedings

Applicable law for substantive issues

See our ready-to-use model clauses

The advantages generally associated with arbitration as a method of dispute resolution are its speed and its confidentiality. The first advantage should be seen in the light of the fact that arbitration is a single instance procedure, i.e. the decision of the arbitral tribunal cannot be appealed on substantive grounds. The confidentiality of the arbitration means that the parties can decide that the proceedings and the award will not be made public. Further advantages of arbitration as a method of dispute resolution are that the parties can choose the arbitrator and that the procedure is flexible, i.e. can be adapted to the agreement of the parties.  

One difference with court proceedings is that parties to an arbitration are responsible for the fees of the Arbitral Tribunal. Arbitration can therefore initially be somewhat more expensive than court proceedings. This means that arbitration as a method of dispute resolution is primarily suitable for commercial disputes of such a nature that the claims raised in the case at least exceed the cost of the Arbitral Tribunal. A guideline here is that the dispute should in any event concern a claim exceeding SEK 500,000. It should be noted, however, that court proceedings generally take longer than arbitration, so that in the long run it may be more expensive to litigate in court than to resolve a dispute through arbitration. 

The main advantages are the speed of the issuing of the final award and the confidentiality of the proceedings. Trade secrets are not disclosed. The parties also have the possibility to appoint arbitrators with specialist expertise. Through an international convention, an arbitral award is enforceable in more than 160 countries worldwide.

Many disputes can be resolved through arbitration. However, there are some exceptions. Thus, not all disputes can be resolved by arbitration. In particular, a dispute must be arbitrable in order to be resolved by arbitration. The term “arbitrable” essentially means that the parties must be able to settle the matter in dispute. Therefore, the dispute must not concern mandatory law, such as marriage, paternity, adoption and liability or other penalties for criminal offences.  

The question of whether a dispute is arbitrable is, in principle, relatively simple to answer. In principle, all commercial disputes can be resolved through arbitration.

Yes, a dispute pending in a district court can be transferred to arbitration, provided the parties agree.

There are several reasons for doing this. For example, the parties may wish to:

• Speed up the process if the court proceedings are lengthy.
• Appoint arbitrators with specific expertise.
• Ensure confidentiality, as court proceedings are usually public while arbitration proceedings are confidential.

To move the dispute to arbitration, the parties must agree to this. A template for such an agreement is available here. The claimant then withdraws the case from court and requests arbitration at the SCC.

Arbitration can be said to be more expensive than litigation in that the parties to arbitration – unlike the parties to litigation – pay the arbitrators’ fees. In litigation, the judges’ salaries are funded by the taxpayer. However, it should be emphasised that arbitration is generally much faster than court proceedings. And since longer proceedings tend to be much more expensive than short ones, court proceedings may in fact be more expensive than arbitration.

Yes, two private individuals can resolve a dispute in arbitration. The main limitation regarding private individuals and arbitration is that arbitration agreements cannot be concluded in advance in the case of consumer disputes, i.e. disputes where one party is a consumer in relation to the other. However, even in such a case, once a dispute has arisen, it is possible for the parties to agree that the dispute in question will be settled by arbitration.

Yes, an arbitration can involve more than two parties. It is also relatively common for an arbitration to include more than two parties, such as construction disputes. A prerequisite for an arbitration to include multiple parties is that they are bound by the same or an identical arbitration agreement.

Unless the parties have agreed otherwise, the Arbitral Tribunal shall, at the request of a party, apportion the costs of the arbitration between the parties, taking into account the outcome of the case, the extent to which the parties have contributed to an efficient and expeditious procedure and any other relevant circumstances.

Since the parties to an arbitration control many aspects of the proceeding, they may agree to terminate the arbitration. In such a case, the Arbitral Tribunal will issue a decision declaring the case closed. If the parties then want the disputed issues to be re-examined, they may request arbitration again.

Once the Arbitral Tribunal has issued the award, the dispute has been settled. For example, if the dispute concerns a claim for payment, a successful claimant can demand payment from the losing party. Since an arbitral award is a writ of execution, the successful party can use the Swedish Enforcement Authority to enforce the claim in question.

As a general rule, the arbitration shall be conducted in the language agreed by the parties. If the parties did not and cannot agree on this issue, the Arbitral Tribunal shall determine the language of the arbitration. In this assessment, the Arbitral Tribunal may consider the domicile of the parties, the language of the contract, applicable law, etc.

The seat of arbitration is the legal jurisdiction chosen by the parties for their arbitration. It is a legal concept rather than a physical location, meaning hearings can take place anywhere whilst the seat remains fixed. The seat determines which national law governs the proceedings and which courts have supervisory jurisdiction. If a party wishes to challenge an award, this can only be done in the courts of the seat. For example, if the seat is Stockholm, any challenge must be brought before the Svea Court of Appeal.

The law of the seat of arbitration is the national law that governs the arbitration proceedings and determines which courts have supervisory jurisdiction over the arbitration. The applicable arbitration rules, on the other hand, are the procedural rules chosen by the parties when they select an arbitration institution (such as the SCC Arbitration Rules or the SCC Rules for Expedited Arbitrations). These rules set out the practical framework for conducting the arbitration, including the process for appointing arbitrators, timelines, and rendering the award. While the law of the seat provides the overarching legal framework and determines matters such as the validity of the arbitration agreement and grounds for challenging an award, the arbitration rules govern the day-to-day conduct of the proceedings. 

Yes. The New York Convention (Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958) allows arbitral awards to be recognised and enforced across approximately 170 signatory countries. This means that an award rendered in one member state (such as Sweden) can be enforced in another without needing to relitigate the dispute. This global enforceability is one of the key advantages of arbitration over litigation, as court judgments are typically more restricted when it comes to international enforcement.