Originally from International Arbitration Court Decisions - 3rd Edition

JUDGMENT BY THE SVEA COURT OF APPEAL, STOCKHOLM, RENDERED IN 2003 IN CASE T 8735-01 

The CME v. Czech Republic case

An investment dispute concerning a bilateral investment protection treaty was settled by arbitration in Stockholm, Sweden. Subsequently, one of the parties challenged the award and requested that the Svea Court of Appeal should declare the award invalid or, alternatively, set aside under the Swedish Arbitration Act.

Subject-Matters:
(1) Whether an arbitrator was excluded from the deliberations.
(2) Whether the tribunal failed to take into consideration applicable law.
(3) Whether the tribunal lacked jurisdiction due to lis pendens and res judicata.
(4) Whether the tribunal exceeded its mandate – the concept of joint tortfeasors.
(5) Whether the tribunal exceeded its mandate – decision concerning determination of the damage.
(6) Whether the tribunal exceeded its mandate – previous investors and prior breaches.
(7) Whether the judgment of the Court of Appeal may be appealed.

Findings:
(1) The arbitrator received all essential communications and was given due time to submit his comments. The chairman had a responsibility to issue the award without unnecessary delay. The allegations that the arbitrator was excluded from the deliberations are unproven and groundless.
(2) An excess of mandate when deciding applicable law, may only be involved where the arbitrators’ interpretation of the choice of law clause proves to be baseless such that their assessment may be equated with the arbitrators almost having ignored a provision regarding applicable law. The tribunal has complied with the provisions of the treaty’s choice of law clause as such must be interpreted and thus has not based its decision on a general assessment of fairness devoid of any basis in law.