The interest for, and usage of, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has to a much greater extent developed in other legal systems than in the Swedish. ADR has gained popularity and, in some cases, one may even say that it has taken an indispensable role for those who deem the legal process inert. The reason why the same legal development has not taken place in Sweden can be partly explained by the principle that procedural agreements per se are invalid if the agreement is not supported by law. This thesis argues that one way to encourage disputing parties to reconcile out of court is by allowing an exception from the principle in favour of pre-litigation clauses consisting of a multi-tiered dispute resolution. These clauses contain several stages, each of them aiming to facilitate an amicable settlement. The intent of the parties by including such a clause in a contract is to seek a settlement by the prescribed ADR method before they commence litigation or arbitration. Such an exemption, however, requires its preconditions in order not to restrict the parties’ right to judicial review. The possibility of assigning the precedent ADR stages the effect of a procedural hindrance during a limited period of time is discovered by assaying legal literature. Analysing this possibility concludes that it might be an alternative for achieving the advantages of ADR while minimizing the risk of restricting the right to have one’s civil rights determined by trial.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:uu-445195 |
| Date | January 2021 |
| Creators | Benfalk, Isabelle |
| Publisher | Uppsala universitet, Juridiska institutionen |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds