See the Supreme Court in cases NJA 2010 s. 508 and NJA 2016 s. 264. See also, for instance, the judgment by Svea Court of Appeal dated 5 September 2013 in the case T 10060-10 regarding challenge of an arbitration award. The District Court had determined in a default judgment, which had gained legal force, that the arbitration agreement between the parties did not confer jurisdiction on the arbitral tribunal to settle the dispute. As a result, the Court of Appeal held that the award was not covered by a valid arbitration agreement and set aside the award under Section 34(1) of the Arbitration Act.
Hänvisas från p. 1 (s. 655)
1.The statutory authority of the arbitrators to determine their own jurisdiction does not however prevent a court from examining the arbitrators’ jurisdiction upon request by a party pursuant to the existing Arbitration Act. This follows from the section 2, first paragraph, second sentence of the Arbitration Act. Pursuant to this provision, a party has a possibility to turn to a court in order to have the arbitrators’ jurisdiction examined both when arbitral proceedings have already commenced and also where no arbitration is pending. The issue referred to the court for determination may be whether a party is bound at all by an arbitration agreement or may relate to the agreement’s applicability to a particular dispute or whether an impediment exists to the arbitration. A declaratory judgment by the court that has become final in the matter is binding on the arbitrators and also on a court that is subsequently requested, for instance after the award is contested in a challenge or invalidity proceeding, to consider the jurisdiction of the arbitrators.s. 655