Swedish Supreme Court Research Articles

Swedish Copyright Evergreens Mini-Maglite?

In April 2009 the Swedish Supreme Court recognized copyright protection for the Mini-Maglite® torch as “artware” without any requirement for a special expression level. The overall impression of the well known Mini-Maglite torch was held to be different from other similar torches.The Court held that it displayed a sufficient degree of independence and originality despite the fact that the functional design properties of the torch are neither new nor original. This article investigates the intersection between different IPR rules in Sweden and certain other European countries and the possible extent of the copyright legislation. It concludes that the Swedish position is untenable and that this demonstrates that there is a need for the European harmonization of substantive copyright legislation

YTTRANDEFRIHET: Om rättigheter som politik och kulturell praktik

The principle of free speech is considered fundamental for the democratic society.
 Free speech is a non-partisan principle that serves and favours no one. However,
 two recent controversial court cases in the Swedish Supreme Court show that the
 neutral free speech principle does not exist. The Supreme Court argued, in spite
 of the presumed neutrality of who says what, that it does matter who says what.
 The two cases concerned hate speeches against homosexuals. In the case against
 the speech of the church cleric, the court argued that freedom of religion is more
 fundamental than free speech and thus considered the disdain of homosexuals
 within the confi nes of the law. In the other case concerning the hate speech by a
 Nazi-nationalistic group, the same court argued that this was illegitimate speech.
 The speeches were similar in content. The conclusion from this might be that
 there is no such thing as free speech. The free speech arena is just a battlefi eld
 where different ideas and ideologies are competing for political and cultural
 hegemony in the state. Law, moreover, is an expression of the court’s defi nition
 of the cultural content in society.

Swedish Supreme Court Refuses to Enforce an Arbitral Award Pursuant to the Public Policy Provision of the New York Convention

Swedish Supreme Court Refuses to Enforce an Arbitral Award Pursuant to the Public Policy Provision of the New York Convention

DATA PROTECTION LAW — SWEDEN: BALANCING DATA PROTECTION AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE CONTEXT OF WEBSITE PUBLISHING — RECENT SWEDISH CASE LAW

The Swedish Supreme Court (Högsta domstolen) has recently handed down a ground-breaking judgment concerned with the difficult balance between the interests in privacy and data protection on the one hand and freedom of expression on the other, in the context of website publishing. 1 1 Case B 293-00, judgment of 12 June 2001. The judgment (in Swedish) is available at: http://www.bankrattsforeningen.org.se/hddomslut.html (last visited 21.8.2001). The judgment is especially noteworthy for casting light on the extent to which the 1995 European Community (EC) Directive on data protection, 2 2 Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ No L 281, 23.11.1995, 31) — hereinafter termed ‘EC Directive’. together with national European legislation implementing the Directive, may apply to certain forms of online ‘journalistic’ activity. It could also cast light on the scope of the exemption for journalism in s 7B(4) of Australia’s Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).

Civil Liability for Costs for Archaeological Investigation Necessitated by Criminal Negligence – A Swedish Supreme Court Case

Civil Liability for Costs for Archaeological Investigation Necessitated by Criminal Negligence – A Swedish Supreme Court Case

Rights of Recourse in Sweden

Under Swedish law, there are two types of defective awards: those that are void and those that are voidable. Awards are void under Section 20 of the Swedish Arbitration Act of 1929 if (1) there was no valid arbitration agreement, (2) the award is not in writing and signed by the arbitrators, or (3) the subject matter was not arbitrable. Awards are voidable under Section 21 of the Act if (1) it was rendered ultra petita or outside applicable time limits, (2) the Swedish venue was improper, (3) an arbitrator was wrongly appointed or otherwise disqualified from acting, or (4) there was a significant procedural irregularity. In 1986, the Swedish Supreme Court confirmed the correctness of earlier doctrinal writing1 when it held that the extraordinary remedy of retrial under the Swedish Code of Procedure is not available (by analogy) with respect to arbitral awards.2 An approving commentator...

Finality of Swedish awards: the Nordic saga in the Laczay Estate v. AG A AB

On 5 June 1985 the Swedish Supreme Court rendered a decision which put a final end to a peculiar saga of Swedish arbitration: it denied a motion for a new trial in the long disputed matter Estate of Tibor and Irma de Laczay v. AGA AD 1 under Chapter 58 Section 1 of the Swedish Procedural Code.9 In 1972 the Estate had first initiated Swedish court proceedings to annul an arbitral award made in Stockholm on 25 October 1972. The award was made in a dispute between the Estate and the Swedish gas and chemicals company AGA AB over royalties for the marketing and exploitation of certain patents owned by Tibor de Laczay prior to his death. The parties had asked the arbitrators (three prominent Swedish lawyers) to make a partial award on the obligations (if any) of AGA AB to report royalties from certain patents earned after the death of Tibor de Laczay and the right of the Estate to such royalties. The arbitrators made a Partial Award in favour of AGAAB. Under Swedish arbitration law (which controlled the arbitral proceedings) a distinction is made between ‘void’ and ‘challengeable’ awards. Section 20 of the Swedish Arbitration Act enumerates the situations in which an award is void, as distinct from challengeable.2 Section 21 of the Arbitration Act, on the other hand, sets forth a number of grounds on which a party may challenge the award within a period of sixty days from the receipt of the award. If no challenge on one of those grounds is made within this period, the award become final and binding.3 The Estate relied on the following allegations as grounds to annul the Partial Award under both Sections 20 and 21: 1. The arbitrators adjudged an issue which by Swedish law cannot be …

The Role of Foreign Trade in the Nazi War Economy

Previous articleNext article No AccessThe Role of Foreign Trade in the Nazi War EconomyArthur SchweitzerArthur Schweitzer Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Journal of Political Economy Volume 51, Number 4Aug., 1943 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/256062 Views: 12Total views on this site Citations: 2Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1943 The University of Chicago PressPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Anna Wallerman A Day in the Life: Aryanization Before the Swedish Supreme Court 1941–42, Law and History Review 36, no.33 (Aug 2018): 593–617.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0738248018000184 Arthur Schweitzer Warlike Actions in Our Time, The Journal of Politics 7, no.44 (Oct 2015): 343–377.https://doi.org/10.2307/2125965